Important news - Denver Post 8/21/01

For those of you who like to back pack into your favorite scenic vista and make photographs....you need to read this. This mornings DENVER POST, page 7B....is an article by Post reporter and editorial board member, Penelope Purdy..a good friend. The article it titled,

"Resounding uproar over fees". You need to read it!....unless you don't care about paying feed for access to the wild federal lands where you take your great photographs. If you don't care, this is what you can expect. You can expect to see a money drop-box at the wilderness sites you so revere, and carry alot of dollar bills with you. At the rate we are going, your going to have to backpack five five miles into the wilderness vista you want to record, and just at the perimeter, you will have to drop a few of your dollars into the box, get a permit, and pay your fee. This is YOUR land...federal land owned by US...THE PEOPLE. I strongly urge each of you to go on the Denver Post internet site, read this article, and understand the threat this project represents. Make your voices heard,...unless of course, you don't mind having a $$$ permit to access the wilderness you and other taxpayers own....and are willing to pay a fee to set up your tripod. THINK ABOUT IT! Richard Boulware - Denver.

Richard, remember when we were young and you could go to a national

park without paying a fee to get in or dues of any kind because you

were a citizen of this country and the citizens were the government,

well, that is not the case any more, we are still citizens, but we no

longer run the country, the BLM, National Park Police, National Park

Service and who knows how many other agencies run them for their own

interests. Pat

Here is the story address:

<p>

www.denverpost.com/stories/0,1002,154%257E111503,00.html

<p>

The more folks know about this subject in whatever state they live

in, the better we all are.

At the risk of getting crucified, let me say that I actually think the

fees at US national parks are too LOW. While it's nice to say that

every American should contribute equally to the tab for managing

wilderness lands, as with any other realm in our society I don't think

it's wrong for those who use something the most to contribute a few

dollars more for its upkeep.

<p>

I know it's an unpopular position; I suppose I've talked with too many

park rangers who relate endless stories of tourists who spend hundreds

or thousands of dollars to travel hundreds or thousands of miles to a

park or wilderness area and then balk at paying a $10 entry fee (for

something far more fulfilling than any amusement park!).

<p>

.............

.............

......

The Denver Post article concerns fees for National Forests, not

National Parks. National Parks have for a long time charged fees for

entrance. A one-year pass allowing entrance to all US National Parks

is $50 per vehicle (or at Rocky Mountain National Park, $30 for an

annual pass, or $15 for a 7 day pass). For $15 additional ($65

total), a Golden Eagle Yearly Pass can be obtained to also include

fees for all sites managed by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

the U. S. Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management. If

a "per person" fee is charged instead of "per vehicle," the pass

includes all persons in the immediate family.

I guess their not making as much money bringing drugs into the country

as they use to.... Thanks for the heads up.

We all pay many "taxes" or "fees" that are based on "usage" rather

than income or headcount. These include fees (or taxes) on gasoline,

automobile licenses, toll roads, public museums, etc.

WAKE UP YOU CLOWNS! Have you even read the article? WE are talking

about fees on BLM land, National Forests etc. NOBODY is talking about

an entrance fee for "JELLYSTONE NATIONAL PARK"! WE ARE TALKING ABOUT

ANY FEDERAL LAND! ANY Federal land. Purdy says in her first

paragraph...." national forests and other public land"! I've got it!

How about you treking for ten miles with your view camera into a

remote site of a pristine water fall on federal land controled by the

BLM. You get to your site, and you see a yellow Kodak arrow that says

this is a greap "Photo OP'! Right next to the Kodak sign, it

says, "Please deposit five dollars as a fee to place your tripod in

the ground, and help us prevent soil errosion. PERMIT REQUIRED FOR

TRIPOD"! WAKE up and smell the coffee, boys. Sorry for the nasayers

who responded without even reading the article by purdy, but, like

others, I think I paid my fee on IRS DAY, APRIL 15th! WHAT YOU NOW

TAKE FOR GRANTED, WILL SOON BE LOST, UNLESS YOU PULL YOUR HEAD OUT OF

YOUR POSTERIOR AND MAKE YOUR VIEWS KNOW TO YOUR REGIONAL

U.S.REPRESENTATIVE. I figure a spot at Yosemite, and an Ansel Adams

spot will be at least $20...just to plant your tripod. THINK ABOUT IT!

Yes Richard, we read it. I mentioned that the fees are for National

Forests (not National Parks) in my post above (Didn't you read it!).

Speaking of user fees, how come you are not complaining about the

$300-500 in fees (over and above the sales tax on gasoline) you pay

each year for gasoline? What about fees to attend public colleges,

toll roads, etc. Do you object to these fees also?

As a concept, I don't have a problem with "user" or "impact" fees. I

believe that MAINTENANCE of public lands is an appropriate use of our

tax dollars, but I believe that users of a resource should bear the

burden of repairing damage and making improvements. Many heavily used

public lands are suffering horribly from overuse, and I suspect that

most reasonable people would agree to a small fee if they knew that

the money would be recycled back into the area in the form of

restoration and improvement efforts. Unfortunately, as is often the

case with government solutions, this program doesn't work that way.

<p>

I've heard varying figures about how the money from this experiment

is distributed; The referenced article says that only 2% goes

towards "trail" improvement. The figures I have (US Forest Service

figures from 2000) claim between 6% and 9% goes towards improvement

of all "facilities" (including trails) and list only a miserable .5%

towards habitat improvement.

<p>

Best case, that's less than 10% for improvements. Repair figures tend

to get thrown in with the maintenance costs, but as near as I can

calculate, the repair costs can't total more than another 10% to 12%,

which means that less than 25 cents on the dollar goes to what I

would consider reasonable.

<p>

On the other hand, the referenced article states 30% goes towards fee

compliance and enforcement (the figures I have say it's closer to

20%). Government sources admit that fully 25% goes towards planning

and administration at this point, which puts basic overhead costs at

45% to 50% or more than twice the amount of repair and improvement!

<p>

I've already written both of my (Colorado) senators, and I'd

encourage everyone who disagrees with this program to do the same in

their own home state. Governmental inertia will probably still extend

this woefully inefficient program, but it can't hurt to make your

voice heard. Ultimately, the "people" will end up having to pay more

and more to visit the "people's" land.

<p>

See you all out in the wild during the magic hour....

<p>

(... but don't forget to bring your wallet!)

No Michael, your Liberal philosophy betrays your logic. Let me put it

this way. When I buy a college education for my kids, I pay a fee for

services delivered. When I pay to use my car, I pay for licences and

a data base for law enforcement to catch bad guys who break the law.

By your logic, every car load of four people should have three

passenger blindfolded, and the toll keeper says the driver is charge

$5 for SEEING. The rest of you...if you keep your blindfolds on are

free of charge. SINCE WHEN IS GODS KINGDOM AND THE VISUAL ENJOYMENT

OF SAID EXPERIENCE TAXABLE. GET A LIFE!

Richard, lets not get personal about this. I don't know how you are

able to determine my "philosophy" about these things, but you are

mistaken in your assumptions. I simply pointed out that we all pay

many user fees, many more than we all realize. For example, on my

Qwest monthly phone bill I pay over $3.00 in state and local fees (in

addition to sales taxes). None of these phone access fees has

anything to do with improving my phone service. I share your concern

about over-taxation in all its forms. But what I can't understand is

why the user fees charged for federal lands are any different in

concept than the user fees charged for all the other things we get

charged for. The bottom line is that the cost of the management and

maintenance of these lands is far more than the fees that are (or

will be) collected, so if user fees do not pay part of the cost,

citizens are going to pay anyway via income taxes. Regardless of what

happens with regard to user fees, you might want to check into the

Golden Eagle yearly upgrade. For an extra $15 (over the National

Park Pass) I believe that you gain access to all Federal lands.

I don't think this is the forum for demonstrations against the United

States government's policy on revenue generation. Perhaps Mr.

Boulware should contact his congessional representative or senator.

Perhaps we all should.

Mr. Michael Feldman: If you took my comments to be a personal attack

upon you, I extend my most sincere apologies. My intent was to attack

your ideas...not you personally. I am confident that you are a

skilled LF photographer or enthusiast, and a nice guy. My point on

all of this is that things have been taken to the extreme here! Yes,

we pay tax on a bunch of BS charges on our telephone bill that stem

from the old days when a telephone was considered a luxury. What

nonsense. You are absolutely correct in your assertion that those

taxes do nothing to improve your local telephone service. I could not

agree with you more strongly. Those taxes are a political compromise

by those who need the tax $$$ to promote more of their own social

agenda. Prying those $$$ out of the hands of a politician is like

trying to pry the cold-dead-hands off a pistol in the hands of a dead

zealot. (and I AM an NRA member). User fees on federal lands are a

scam. We already pay those fees every April 15th when we pay our

income tax. Jellystone National Park is another matter. Over use and

high concentrations of visitors puts financial pressure on the

managers to upgrade rapidly deteriorating infrastructure...caused by

those hoards of visitors. No problem.

With regard to the Golden Eagle Pass.....for special upgraded

facilities....I have no problem with that....but you are still

missing the point. ALL federal lands is the issue. Sorry, but I am

part owner in those lands and have paid for that ownership by my

income taxes....every year. I can go places to shoot where the last

person there happened twenty years ago. Should I be charged a user

fee for making no mark, leaving no trail? I think not. Your comment

that management of public lands is akin to managing Jellystone

National Park, is simply not true. Most public land is cost free in

terms of upkeep. Nature just does Her thing...and we enjoy it and

protect it. I already have access to federal land, especially BLM

land and I exercise that right months out of each year, and I pay no

fee, except my own code that says I pack out what I pack in...and

leave no trace of my being there. If you opt to send your $300 tax

refund back to the Feds...be my guest. Tell them it's your 'tripod

fee', in advance. I am tired of being taxed to death, and being taxed

on viewing and photographing wilderness, it going to damned far. The

great thing about photography, like Canon says in their

commercials...is that you can go there, do that, and leave it the way

you found it. I'll be damned if I am going to be taxed for that.

If you read the "horror stories" following the article, you begin to

sense that one of the reasons these fees are so irritating is that,

unlike NPS admission, they are much less uniformly imposed and much

more poorly advertised and understood. If you are unlucky, you get

nabbed, but most of the time, there is no clear "entrance station" or

fee area boundary.

<p>

I was in Ouray in July, and luckily had read about the fee for

driving offroad around Yankee Boy Basin. I was able to buy the pass

($5) at my lodging. If I hadn't seen the USAToday note about the

arrests, or inquired at my lodge, I am not sure that I would have

seen the poorly placed fee box on the way up to the basin. Even when

I read the information at the box, it wasn't really clear what areas

required a fee, and what areas did not.

<p>

I am willing to pay modest fees, but I expect the following in return:

<p>

1. Clear and unambiguous description of what the fee is for, and

where it is paid. This includes signage at the fee site, and on all

USGS and USFS maps.

<p>

2. Fair and uniform enforcement of the fees.

<p>

3. The fee to be used for maintenance and PROTECTION of my lands.

<p>

Unfortunately, given the current administration, I think protection

of my lands is a pipe(line) dream.

I propose a tax on those who use all caps; not to mention those who

rant.

This kind of thing really does irk me. These charges are totally

illogical and a complete load of BS from where I stand. I get really

tired of all these federal agencies "protecting" our land from all

these nonexistent threats and slipping my $5 in their back pocket.

Federal lands, parks, etc should <i>not</i> be run like a business.

Now, if there was some sort of (reasonable) flat usage fee for

federal lands and such, and I could be <u>guaranteed</u> that every

cent of that would go towards protecting, restoring, and properly

managing the land, I wouldn't have any problem with it. However,

seeing as such a set of circumstances has about a snowball's chance

in hell of ever coming to be, I must wholeheartedly oppose the

policies either currently in effect or soon to be so.

<p>

Not to raise any other issues here, but the US government is getting

too big, too powerful, and above all, far too stupid. This is a

perfect example of how things are getting out of hand. This is a

matter of pure mismanagement of lands and how the big kids in DC feel

like ruining the game for everyone else on the playground for no good

reason whatsoever. Our supposed representatives are greviously

misrepresenting us and I think that we really need to do something

about it. Whether that means writing letters, joining a protest, or

engaging in a bit of civil disobedience will vary from person to

person. However, this is one of those things that, given that we

take the proper steps, we can do something about.

On it's face, it sounds reasonable... Gee, those who use it

should pay for it. How nice, how fair.

The reality is, we have become complacent, soft and numb. We

have been conditioned by clever spin words like contribution and

investment when it comes to taxes and government spending.

We all just lay back and turn our brains off and get the big

screwgie. We are taxed in total right now at the highest rate in

this countries history! We are told there is a great surplus (yeah, I

know it's just phoney accounting). And now we should pay

more?

Yes, I love the federal lands. And I go to them quite often around

here. But the fact of the matter is the money is already there. I

have worked on capitol hill and dealt with budget matters. It

would make you sick to see the ineptitude with which federal

agencies deal with money. These agencies are not concerned

with spending money wisely, they are concerned with spending

every penny they have so they can prove they need more the next

year. The spending frenzy that goes on within federal agencies

near the end of the fiscal year is a sight to behold.

At some point we need to say enough. And that time is overdue.

If the people who started this great experiment 225 years ago

(based in part on a tax of less than 1%) could see the happiness

with which some people open their wallets and give money to

the government at the point of virtual gun....It would be as

shocking as landing on the planet of the apes.

It was my understanding that the check I wrote on April 15 went

entirely to the missile defense program, not to management of public

lands.

<p>

................

...but I shouldn't be overly flippant about an issue that is real (and

clearly elicits real passion!). I think Glenn Kroeger's post above is

eminently sensible, and I second the points he makes: if there are to

be fees, they should be fair, modest, and well accounted-for.

<p>

......

You mean, you're supposed to put money *into* those dinky little

wooden boxes at the park entrance?

<p>

Where's the fun in that?

Taxes {income and sales} are lost money. There is no use in crying or

complaining about it because it is the government we chose. If you do

not like the policies do something to change them rather than typing

out your aggravation. In your cushy computer chair. On an impartial

keyboard. Burried under your security blanket. Bythe way this is a

photograpic fourm not a political one.

BACK TO THE REAL SUBJECT. I would like to quote an earlier post "I

pack out what I pack in...and leave no trace of my being there" well

some people do not always follow this philosophy. I know that as hard

as I might try I have lost a few items one is a Nikon 35mm F2 if you

have found it please send it back. IMHO it is worth helping to pay a

living wage to people to keep up the parks or forests or whatever.

Keep in mind that most of us pay incredible amounts of money to ruin

the environment with film and paper developing chemicals. I haven't

heard any of the photographers even mention this little photographic

secret. Bitch all you want but photographers are the biggest

hypocrites and should be charged if not double what the public viewer

is charged to clean up their well hidden trash.

As an aside - I believe the assertion that the Golden Eagle Pass

covers these fees may not be entirely true. It was explained to me

(at Rocky Mountain National Park headquarters, late last year) that

the Golden Eagle Pass only covers ADMISSION type fees. Fees that are

specified as usage fees are not covered (except in the case of

several, specifically mentioned National Recreation Areas).

<p>

My understanding of the this program is that it can also include user

fees, and that the Golden Eagle Pass would not exclude you from owing

a fee of this type. Several government websites specifically mention

confusion surrounding who and when the fees are due as one of the

improvements that must be made.

<p>

Several highly used Colorado areas are actually under contract to

private companies to manage, maintain, and collect usage fees. My

Golden Eagle Pass has not consistently been accepted at these sites.