FRONTIER SPIRIT

Making Public Lands a RAT-free Zone

By Bill Schneider, 4-12-05

The Montana Legislature just sent the federal government another stay-out-of-my-life memo by passing a resolution demanding the repeal of the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act.

George Ochenski, who lobbied for the resolution, says FLREA is “misnamed� and in the “more popular vernacular is known as the Recreation Access Tax, or RAT.� If you have been hiking in Washington, Oregon, Colorado and other western states, you might already know about the RAT because you were charged a fee at the trailhead or in some cases, such as Mount Evans in Colorado, to drive on a paved road through your own land, otherwise known as the National Forests.

“Although the capital routinely ignores the opinions of a state like Montana, which boasts fewer than a million people scattered across the fourth-largest landmass in the union,� Ochenski explains, “it better think twice when it comes to charging Montanans to use the national lands and waters that surround us.

Hal Harper, Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer’s chief policy advisor agrees: "If you want to incite revolution in this state, start charging hunters and anglers and campers a fee to access their own public lands."

Such a resolution lacks legal teeth and certainly won't stop the federal government, but Ochenski notes that “such a stunning political cross-section of Montanans showed up to support it that maybe, just maybe, it might garner a little attention from the federal powers.�

RAT was originally considered “temporary and experimental� and commonly referred to as the “Fee Demo Program,� but the federal government found the revenue too seductive to give up. In December 2004, Congress passed and President Bush signed legislation extending the RAT through 2005. The issue has split the conservation community. Some conservationists oppose any RAT-like program, but other outdoor enthusiasts supported the original concept of the access fee to improve trail maintenance and other public works. In recent years, support has started to erode because some of the fee revenue has been siphoned off to protect poorly placed homes from forest fires. Supporters envisioned the RAT as “extra� money going to trail development, but those budgets have often suffered corresponding cuts approximately equal to the new revenue generated by the fees.

As an interesting footnote, Ochenski made the following observation:

“Who could have predicted that backpackers of the Montana Wilderness Association would be on the same side as the four-wheelers and dirt bikers of the Montana Trail Vehicle Riders Association? Or that the Sierra Club would find an ally in Montanans for Multiple Use? How is it possible that these traditional opponents were also joined by the Montana Wood Products Association, the Montana State Parks Foundation, Citizens for Balanced Use, the Montana Logging Association and the governor's office?

“The answer is simple. None of us would ever consent to pay a fee every time we wanted to enter our home or fire up the barbecue in our own back yard. Yet, under the provisions of the RAT, public-land managers can and will start charging us every time we camp at the little river pullout on Bureau of Land Management land we've used for decades, or launch our canoe from a federal site, or have a family picnic in the national forest. These lands are our heritage as American citizens, and if the feds think they can charge us to use something we already own, the 49-1 vote by which the measure cleared the Montana Senate should inform them that they are terribly mistaken.�

Learn more:
FLREA FAQs
Free Our Forests

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.