WILD BILL
America the Beautiful Pass Sends Us a Strong Message
By Bill Schneider, 12-07-06
 |
|
 | |
| The new America the Beautiful Pass. | |
|
First let’s talk about public involvement. The pass has been made more controversial by a severe lack of advance public information. Except for agency insiders and lobbyists, nobody really knew the interagency pass was coming, even though it goes on sale in January.
Agency folks worry about “misinformation,” but to me, it’s mostly lack of information. And I have hard time believing this isn’t by design. The entire recreation fee program has been an inside job from the day it all started back in 1996 when the “temporary” fee demo program was earmarked on a must-pass spending bill. Same goes for several extensions of the “temporary” program. Then, in 2004, the entire Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act was earmarked on another spending bill, which made the “temporary” fee demo program permanent and created the ATB Pass. The new interagency pass has been in development for two years, but there has been a pathetic--and I have to believe, purposeful--information void on what was happening.
Setting aside for a minute the pro-con debate on the ATB Pass or any other fee, I must ask: How many of you even knew about it until two days ago? What are the agency chiefs so afraid of that they can’t ask for public input on any of the above major actions? I happen to know that agency public affairs folks encouraged the chiefs to do more advance marketing, but they were rebuffed.
Could it be that the chiefs and their political bosses are afraid of the answer? That must be it because they insisted on sneaking fee legislation into the lawbooks in the dark of night with minimal or if any public input and no congressional up-and-down vote. Ditto for implementation of the earmarked law, such as development of the ATB Pass. In fact, the entire earmarking strategy employed to give us our current recreation fee policy insults democracy.
But the politicos have it figured, I guess, because they know we Americans will adapt and pay up just like we always do. They know they might get a few barbs like this one, but the pain will quickly dissipate, and soon we’ll forget about it, right?
Although the ATB pass applies to other federal lands, right now it’s still mostly about the national parks. As I discussed last week’s column, the national parks have experienced a steady decline in visitation for at least ten years, but NPS experts dispute the idea that fees have been a major factor in the decline. And for somebody traveling across the country on a two-week vacation to western national parks, I’m sure they’re correct. The entrance fees or annual pass would be a small expense compared to other costs. But for locals, especially occasional users, I persist in thinking entrance fees contribute heavily to the decline.
Anyway, looking at the big picture, now what do we do? Entrance fees for national parks have been a fact of life for decades and mostly accepted by the general public, but until 1996, revenue from entrance fees and annual passes was not a focus for the agencies. It was a minor blimp in agency budgets. Today, the ATB Pass gives us another strong signal that policy has radically changed, and this is what should really concern all of us who value our national parks and our other public lands.
Nowadays, it’s all about making our national parks and other federal lands “self-supporting” or “sustainable” instead of adequately funding programs through the appropriations process like we’ve always done for most of the last century. Can we really run the entire national park system, “America’s best idea,” according to Wallace Stegner, with fees and volunteers? That sure seems to be the current policy.
And I’m not the only person who worries about this. Blogger Kurt Repanshek has a great piece on the ATB Pass on his website, NationalParksTraveler.com. He quotes Bill Wade, chair of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees executive council on the above question.
"I think it (ATB Pass) will lead to a continuing spiraling upward of entrance and user fees and, in turn, a continuing decline in park visitation," says Wade. "I believe that fees are likely to be the biggest cause of the decline, over the past decade or so. It is becoming clearer to me that the Congress should bite the bullet and abolish all entrance fees to national parks and substitute appropriated funds to the levels needed to cover all essential costs of operating national parks. Only in that way will we not be discriminating against those who can't afford to visit their national heritage areas and will we be sending the message that these areas belong to ALL Americans, not just those who can afford to pay."
Call me old-fashioned (I’ve been called worse), but I agree with Bill Wade. I much prefer a return to past policy when we funded our parks with budget appropriations, when entrance fees were small or nonexistent, and when we valued our national parks as national treasures instead of self-sustaining, money-making machines.
And now, it isn’t only the national parks. The ATB Pass covers most federal lands, most of which are still free, but how long will this last? Does the new interagency pass set the stage for more federal lands to have entrance stations and “Iron Rangers” to collect fees? Agency reps deny this, but it sure seems to foreshadow the future.
It isn’t the ATB pass or any other national park fee that bothers me; it’s the attitude, the secrecy, underhandedness, and the fear of being upfront with the real agenda, whatever it is. Why can’t the agency chiefs have the cajoles to face the funding issue head-on with their customers? This ridiculous, earmarking, behind-the-scenes modus operandi needs to stop. I might favor some current fees and policies, but how they become law or policy? Never. This is no way to run a democracy.
Hopefully, at least one member of the blue-green Congress coming into power in January will focus on this issue and make the agencies redo the entire program and then ask for congressional approval the way the U.S. Constitution says it should be done.
Footnote: I plan to send a link to this column to key elected officials in the New West and ask them to start over on our recreation fee program and do it right this time. You might consider doing the same.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Some may recall that it was Ohio Congressman Ralph Regula who introduced the legislation that gave us the much detested Recreation Fee Demonstration Program in 1996. It was Congressman Regula who introduced the legislation that gave us the Recreation Access Tax (aka the RAT) in 2004. It was Mr. Regula who, in 1992, introduced legislation that for the first time in America's History proposed the creation of an outdoor recreation PASSPORT --- a passport to be purchased and carried by all who recreate upon America's Public Lands.
That 1992 legislative proposal, which can be read at http://www.wildwilderness.org/blog/show-me.html, was broadly denounced and soundly defeated.
By way of contrast, the legislative proposal that has given us both the RAT and the America the Beautiful Pass was never so much as introduced in the US Senate. It was attached in the middle of the night onto "must pass" legislation and became law over the objection of the American People and of those in Congress who had vowed to prevent this bill from becoming the law of the land.
The Pass is called "America the Beautiful" but there is nothing beautiful in how it became the law of the land. There is nothing beautiful in that fact that citizens must now pay to walk in their National Forests. There is nothing beautiful in having to show a photo ID when using the new America the Beautiful Pass --- or is that Passport?
(Learn more at http://www.wildwilderness.org )
Scott Silver, Executive Director
Wild Wilderness
Some may recall that it was Congressman Ralph Regula (R-OH) who introduced the legislation that gave us the much detested Recreation Fee Demonstration Program in 1996. It was Congressman Regula who introduced the legislation that gave us the Recreation Access Tax (aka the RAT) in 2004. It was Mr. Regula who, in 1992, introduced legislation that, for the first time in America's History, proposed the creation of an outdoor recreation PASSPORT -- a passport to be purchased and carried by all who recreate upon America's Public Lands. That 1992 legislative proposal was broadly denounced and soundly defeated.
By way of contrast, the legislative proposal that has given us both the RAT and the America the Beautiful Pass was never so much as introduced in the US Senate. It was attached in the middle of the night onto "must pass" legislation and became law over the objection of the American People and of those in Congress who had vowed to prevent this bill from becoming the law of the land.
The Pass is called "America the Beautiful" but there is nothing beautiful in how it became the law of the land. There is nothing beautiful in that fact that citizens must now pay to walk in their National Forests. There is nothing beautiful in having to show a photo ID when using the new America the Beautiful Pass -- or is that Passport?
Scott Silver, Executive Director
Wild Wilderness
Come on, Bill. Be honest with us. Have you bothered to be a good reporter, or are you just regurgitating the drivel we've had to read for more than a decade from these folks who we know where they're always going to land on the issue of fees?
Have you read the legislation? The act bars the federal agencies from charging fees at a whole lot of places I had to pay fees under that old "fee demo."
Take a look. Read the legislation yourself: http://www.fs.fed.us/recreation/programs/feedemo/fee_legislation.html
Tomorrow will be the second anniversary of the President signing the legislation. What have you been doing the past two years?
I'm not excited about paying $80 in one sitting for the ATB, but it's still a bargain. Look at the entrance fees for even one visit a year to each of Montana's current major federal fee sites:
Big Hole National Battlefield - $5/vehicle/week
Big Horn Canyon National Recreation Area - $5/day
Glacier National Park - $25/week/vehicle
Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail Interpretive Center - $5/day/adult (kids 15 and younger free)
Pompeys Pillar National Historic Landmark - $3/vehicle
Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument - $10/vehicle
Yellowstone National Park - $25/week/vehicle
What are we up to? $78? Check my math, please.
I can visit any or all of them any time I want, as many times as a I want, for a whole year! The ATB pays its way! Sure, some years I might not visit Glacier and Yellowstone but once a year. Other years, I might go to each of them twice. It's a wash over the long term.
For locals who visit often, ATB is even more of a bargain, just as the Golden Eagle Pass was. If a local only goes occasionally, then pay as they go.
What if I go on a road trip and I visit Yellowstone, Rocky Mountain, Mesa Verde, Arches, Zion, Timpanogas, and Craters of the Moon? ATB is still a bargain, and I'm putting my money where my mouth is - supporting the parks, which I love.
Under "fee demo," I resented being nickled and dimed to death every time I went to a new region and had to pay new fees that weren't covered by my Golden Eagle Pass. The nickle and diming ends under ATB. That's a good thing!
What we should be concerned about is families spending $500 for PlayStation 3, plus about $59 a game. Is that a bargain?
Or $300/year for cable TV. Is that getting mom, dad, and the kids in touch with nature?
We should be trumpeting the opportunities for families to experience nature on our street, in our city, across our state, and across our nation - the vast majority of it for free. As well as the bargain that will still exist January 1 to visit federal sites thanks to the ATB.
And if you still don't like ATB, you'll find by reading the legislation that authority for the program automatically sunsets ten years after enactment.
If Congress had deliberated and passed the FLREA like it does any other major legislation, I doubt there would be a problem because, of course, as you probably know, the act would have never passed.
I agree there are many sideboads in FLREA (and I have read it that prevent agencies from charging fees, and the NPS and other Interior agencies seem to have followed the letter and spirit of the law, but the Forest Service has been too aggressive and created much ill will and backlash toward FLREA and the entire recreation fee program.
Bill
Let's see, at eight hours a day, five days a week, that's 12 weeks of volunteer labor.
And as for automatic sunsets, I'll believe it when I see it. These things have a way of taking on a life of its own as people become wedded to the status quo, whatever that may be at the time.
The Recreation Access Tax, or Rat, is the name opponents of the law gave FLREA, so essentially, it is the same thing, just to very different ways of looking at it.
Bill
They should have done some demographics to find out why more money was needed, wasn't' there just an article on the fact they are not spending the money they are taking in now? For instance why price American out of parks and forests, but continue to subsidize foreign tourists? I suspect studies would show they make up at least half of visitors to major NPs.
If the NFs are in financial trouble now that they have virtually stopped logging, then someone needs to take a good look at their books, that was supposed to be costing them money, so why don't they have more money now?
Everything in life has a value to us, somethings more than others. Those things are different for each of us. Dr. Thomas Sowell has had a series of 4 excellent columns the last week or so, on what is paid and value. He makes the very clear point that when we buy a tv for instance, the tv means more to use than the money we have, but the money means more to the guy selling the tv.
If you would rather have the money in your pocket than a trip to a NP, that is your choice, it is a matter of choosing what is most valuable to you. It is impossible for everyone to have everything they want, you always give up one thing to have something else.
Two of my grandsons have joined the navy, one is now out after 2 tours in Iraq. Neither have regrets, they were willing to give up some time being free and without real responsibility to keep our country safe, that means more to them than buying a new pickup or any of the other things that 18-20 year old guys do....at least for a time. They know they are risking their lives, and we, their family, knows it too. I'm not sure how you come to think that they make enough to be mercenaries.
You do have access to your NPs, you just may have to give up something else. If it comes to spending the money to go on a shopping spree or to Yellowstone, it is no contest, I will always take Yellowstone. I suspect the fuel to get there and drive around even if you sleep in a tent costs more even than the $80 pass.....and you can use the pass again and again, but the fuel is gone.
I am concerned about NPS sitting on a 243 million kitty from previous funds that they are not spending, they are "saving" while they are crying about not having enough funding. I do think that the new funds must be stipulated that they must be spent on upkeep in the parks and accounted for on an annual basis. I also think that NPS must be made to account for the accumulation and use it before the "Pass" is instituted.
<3 sagepowder
You can blow $30 bucks at Yosemite for a three day pass (with a passenger on the back of your motorcycle).
Three years ago some vandals graffitied the rocks in Yosemite. What I'm getting at is a lot of lowlife people litter and tear up our national treasures. How many broken bottles, used diapers and trash have you seen in our lakes and streams? Some folks have brought their "cultural" ways from their 3rd world countries to our parks, waterways and neighborhoods.
Perhaps they will stay home if it costs money to use our natural resources. We can only hope.
As a regular visitor from Ireland I was astonished at what good value the national parks pass was - I wouldn't get a decent night out at home for $50! I am visiting California Utah & Colorado for a month shortly & the trip would be nothing without all those beautiful places that I will happily pay $80 to enjoy.
Forget democracy for a moment- charge the foreigners plenty! I expect my family trip to cost in the region of $20000. I plan to visit at least 7 national parks not to mention other areas the pass may cover. Would I pay $100, $200? Almost certainly.
If I lived in Springdale I would feel the $1.54 a week to spend my life in Zion was the biggest bargain ever.
Oh & Mr Berberich, this Irishman never leaves trash in a national park!