T
TFinalshot
Guest
NO PUBLIC OR CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW, YET
Coalition: Forest Service Working Silently on Plans That Could Close Thousands of Recreation Sites
By Bill Schneider, 8-30-06
My inbox is full every morning, but this morning is was full of really bad news, mainly a long report from the Western Slope No-Fee Coalition. In the six-page report and accompanying press release, the coalition, which has been the main force in fighting the RAT (Recreation Access Tax) being rapidly imposed and enforced on national forests and Bureau of Land Management lands, blasted a secret plan by the Forest Service to close or privatize vast numbers of recreation sites, even the majority of the sites on some national forests.
In the report, the coalition charges that since at least 2002, the FS has been secretly implementing a policy initiative called Recreation Site Facility Master Planning (RSFMP) that threatens to impose a for-profit model on the management of all developed recreation sites on America's 155 national forests.
"The RSFMP program is going to send shockwaves through National Forest gateway communities nationwide," said President Robert Funkhouser in the press release. "This will impact local communities' economies, public health, and quality of life."
Funkhouser pointed out that among the management actions planned or already underway are removal of toilets, capping of drinking water systems, and bulldozing of campsites.
According to the coalition, no public or congressional review of the RSFMP policy has yet occurred. Although 22 Forests have completed five-year RSFMP site closure plans and implementation has begun, none of the plans have been publicly released. The coalition actually obtained two complete plans Deschutes and Tongass National Forests) and partial information about three more forests. From the data available so far the coalitions projects that between 3,000 and 5,000 recreation sites will be closed or decommissioned, and as many as 4,000 more will be converted to fee sites or turned over to private for-profit concessionaires to manage.
I called the Northern Region offices of the FS in Missoula and talked to Terry Knupp, regional coordinator for this program. Clearly, the Northern Region is not the focal point of the coalition's criticism because the process is moving more slowly and cautiously. Also, Knupp assures that there are some plans to involve the public at least on site-specific decisions. "We have a responsibility to keep the public safe and to keep these sites healthy," Knupp points out.
According to Knupp, national policy coming from the Bush Administration, not any Act of Congress or official administrative rule, is requiring the preparation of the RSFMP plans. The Northern Region (Montana and northern Idaho) plans to have the plans done be the end of next year. Standards have been set, Knupp explains, and each site must be operated to those standards. If there is a toilet at a trailhead, for example, it needs to be cleaned regularly.
If there isn't enough money in the budget to operate to standards, Knupp says some action must be taken, such as closing the recreation site, removing facilities, turning it over to a concessionaire, or getting volunteers to operate or clean the site. Another option is charging a fee, but unlike other FS regions, the Northern Region has been cool on this idea.
Also, apparently, the Northern Region is better off, budget-wise, than other regions. "It's early in the process, but right now it doesn't look like we will have to remove many facilities in order to operate to standards," Knupp predicts. "It doesn't look like we have to take drastic actions."
But the coalition report contains damning details from other regions. In Oregon's Deschutes National Forest, for example, only 14 out of 212 existing developed recreation sites will remain open and free to public use. The rest will be closed and obliterated, converted to fee sites or turned over to private concessionaires.
Ditto for three Colorado national forests where the same fate awaits 72 percent of the developed recreation sites.
The basic objective of the secret plans, according to the coalition, is to make all recreation sites "sustainable," which means they must generate enough income to pay for themselves. If not, they must be closed, obliterated or turned over to the private sector for management.
In the report's conclusion, coalition calls on national forest users to demand that the RSFMP plans be subjected to public comment and review as specified in the National Environmental Policy Act, just like forest management and travel plans. The group also called for Congress to scrutinize the program to ask for an audit of FS recreation spending compared to appropriated funds.
"It is imperative that this secret policy see the light of day," concluded Funkhouser. "This is a drastic change to National Forest recreation management that should not be allowed to proceed behind closed doors."
Coalition: Forest Service Working Silently on Plans That Could Close Thousands of Recreation Sites
By Bill Schneider, 8-30-06
My inbox is full every morning, but this morning is was full of really bad news, mainly a long report from the Western Slope No-Fee Coalition. In the six-page report and accompanying press release, the coalition, which has been the main force in fighting the RAT (Recreation Access Tax) being rapidly imposed and enforced on national forests and Bureau of Land Management lands, blasted a secret plan by the Forest Service to close or privatize vast numbers of recreation sites, even the majority of the sites on some national forests.
In the report, the coalition charges that since at least 2002, the FS has been secretly implementing a policy initiative called Recreation Site Facility Master Planning (RSFMP) that threatens to impose a for-profit model on the management of all developed recreation sites on America's 155 national forests.
"The RSFMP program is going to send shockwaves through National Forest gateway communities nationwide," said President Robert Funkhouser in the press release. "This will impact local communities' economies, public health, and quality of life."
Funkhouser pointed out that among the management actions planned or already underway are removal of toilets, capping of drinking water systems, and bulldozing of campsites.
According to the coalition, no public or congressional review of the RSFMP policy has yet occurred. Although 22 Forests have completed five-year RSFMP site closure plans and implementation has begun, none of the plans have been publicly released. The coalition actually obtained two complete plans Deschutes and Tongass National Forests) and partial information about three more forests. From the data available so far the coalitions projects that between 3,000 and 5,000 recreation sites will be closed or decommissioned, and as many as 4,000 more will be converted to fee sites or turned over to private for-profit concessionaires to manage.
I called the Northern Region offices of the FS in Missoula and talked to Terry Knupp, regional coordinator for this program. Clearly, the Northern Region is not the focal point of the coalition's criticism because the process is moving more slowly and cautiously. Also, Knupp assures that there are some plans to involve the public at least on site-specific decisions. "We have a responsibility to keep the public safe and to keep these sites healthy," Knupp points out.
According to Knupp, national policy coming from the Bush Administration, not any Act of Congress or official administrative rule, is requiring the preparation of the RSFMP plans. The Northern Region (Montana and northern Idaho) plans to have the plans done be the end of next year. Standards have been set, Knupp explains, and each site must be operated to those standards. If there is a toilet at a trailhead, for example, it needs to be cleaned regularly.
If there isn't enough money in the budget to operate to standards, Knupp says some action must be taken, such as closing the recreation site, removing facilities, turning it over to a concessionaire, or getting volunteers to operate or clean the site. Another option is charging a fee, but unlike other FS regions, the Northern Region has been cool on this idea.
Also, apparently, the Northern Region is better off, budget-wise, than other regions. "It's early in the process, but right now it doesn't look like we will have to remove many facilities in order to operate to standards," Knupp predicts. "It doesn't look like we have to take drastic actions."
But the coalition report contains damning details from other regions. In Oregon's Deschutes National Forest, for example, only 14 out of 212 existing developed recreation sites will remain open and free to public use. The rest will be closed and obliterated, converted to fee sites or turned over to private concessionaires.
Ditto for three Colorado national forests where the same fate awaits 72 percent of the developed recreation sites.
The basic objective of the secret plans, according to the coalition, is to make all recreation sites "sustainable," which means they must generate enough income to pay for themselves. If not, they must be closed, obliterated or turned over to the private sector for management.
In the report's conclusion, coalition calls on national forest users to demand that the RSFMP plans be subjected to public comment and review as specified in the National Environmental Policy Act, just like forest management and travel plans. The group also called for Congress to scrutinize the program to ask for an audit of FS recreation spending compared to appropriated funds.
"It is imperative that this secret policy see the light of day," concluded Funkhouser. "This is a drastic change to National Forest recreation management that should not be allowed to proceed behind closed doors."
