This Land is Whose Land? Public Lands, Private Gains
by Lah-May
Imagine yourself walking down a public city street and being stopped by a "city service" employee who asks you for your pass. Ridiculous? If the scenario took place in public forest lands, you might very well find yourself receiving a citation from a "forest service" employee.
The USDA Forest Service and other Federal land management agencies received Congressional authority in 1996 to collect new user fees for recreation use on public lands as a test of the effectiveness and public acceptance of such fees.
In a “catch-22” setup, all fees for passes sold are counted as “yes” votes in favor of the program. Those who vote “no” and don’t buy a pass can be issued a Notice of Noncompliance (NON). Payment of the fine counts as a "yes" vote. Fined resisters have the option of fighting citations in court; however, they may face six months in jail and/or a $5,000 fine if they lose the court challenge. The nonprofit organization, Free Our Forests, recommends sending NONs to your Congressman along with a complaint to vote "no." They also offer assistance in fighting the fees. Public lands are still free of charge for health, spiritual, and educational purposes; however, forest service employees usually attach NONs to parked vehicles without seeking out the occupants to ascertain their activity.
Ever since the Reagan era, the U.S. government decided federal monies (taxes) were better allocated on, primarily, military equipment and technology. So, numerous departments and programs have seen their budgets slashed. Fewer tax dollars are being directed to support and protect public lands.
Corporations instead have been created and politicians lobbied to set up numerous "pay for play" management situations paving the way for commercial opportunities on public forest lands.
American Recreation Coalition (ARC) is the group that started the "Pay-Us-for-Using-Your-Own-Land" issue. Its membership consists of snowmobile, jetski, and RV manufacturers, oil companies, ski associations, campgrounds, and Walt Disney. Their management paradigm is directed toward maximizing commercialization, privatization, and motorization of our natural heritage. Ultimately, this "pay for play" system could be used to restrict access to most public lands, except on developed properties managed by ARC members and its spin-off—the Recreation Roundtable, which consists of recreation industry and media industry CEOs.
In an article entitled "Public Lands Policies and Predictions" written by Bob Ashley and published May 1998 in Motor Home Magazine, ARC president Derrick Crandall offered his vision of the future management of our national parks, forests, and scenic byways. He also revealed corporate intent, pointing out that the "New York state-park system has an official soft drink, just as the Olympics has an official soft drink and everything else." He added that ARC "authored legislation in Congress that would have allowed a corporation to become some kind of an exclusive supporter of the national parks or a specific national park."
Free Our Forests lists on their website (www.freeourforests.org) fourteen reasons why the Recreational Fee Demo Program is wrong—from the public being double- and triple-taxed for use of public lands to denying the fact that humans are also a part of the natural world to addressing Forest Service mismanagement. Besides Free Our Forests, many other organizations and activists are working to educate the public on the facts behind the fees. The Arizona No Fee Coalition states their "long-term goals are to end the Fee Demo Program and the privatization of public lands while creating a national policy shift that reallocates congressional funding for recreational opportunities and further preservation of our public lands.
On a hopeful note, some local governments are starting to listen to the voices of the people who foresee the ominous direction the fee programs are heading. In October 2002, the Sedona (Arizona) City Council voted 5-2 to pass a resolution to restore proper funding for public lands in order to eliminate the Recreational Fee Demonstration Program known in the Sedona area as the "Red Rock Pass."
Humankind, particularly of Western civilization, has an often neglected need to connect with the living spiritual forces in the quiet of nature. The historical mindset of Western civilization has been to see only the materialistic value of the natural world—ravaging the planet for profit with no regard for the resultant ecological or cultural destruction.
Native American culture has often reflected respect for the environment coupled with a willingness to share their values. Islam’s Koran is rich in proverbs and precepts that speak of the Almighty's design for creation and humanity's responsibility for preserving it. Jesus, as presented in The URANTIA Book, was a man who loved nature—a man who would commune with His Father as He walked through the hills; who encouraged His followers to pray amidst the quiet surroundings of nature; who taught that children, especially, should "worship God in the tabernacles of nature…so that the highest of human emotions may be aroused in association with the intellectual approach to spiritual communion with God." (The URANTIA Book, p. 1840:05)
If public lands are to be all people’s lands, citizens must work cooperatively and proactively to "drive" corporations and their opportunist maneuverings off public lands. If elected public officials listen to corporations over the public, new officials must be elected—officials whose votes reflect that which is respectful to the environment and in service to humankind.