New Day Use Fees & Increase Existing Fees, Public Lands

Off Pavement wrote:
If you don't like public land fees, you may want to follow this website...

Western Slope No-Fee Coalition

Interesting group but typical of such groups they take things out of context.

We've stayed on private ranch land. All you have to do is ask.

2gypsies wrote:
Really? Ranchers letting RVing boondockers fish in their streams and lakes? They are extremely protective of their land and water.

The whole object would be with regards to ranchers who needed a few more bucks to meet expenses/taxes per year from their large land holdings. IAW, ranchers who are land rich but money poor.

They might take $30/day for dozens of rigs per day to be boondocking on their X000 acres of land that otherwise would be earning them next to nothing.

pnichols wrote:
Ranches with a fishing stream, or small lake, or hiking trails on them would cost more per day.

(Oooops....I guess I forgot about lawyers.)

Really? Ranchers letting RVing boondockers fish in their streams and lakes? :) They are extremely protective of their land and water.

There is a possible future approach to providing areas for boondock camping - how about private boondock camping?

Kindof like a commercial campground but with way larger, access controlled, tracts of private land with no facilities provided - self contained pack it in pack it out camping only. Probably there are large ranches out there that could pick up some extra income by allowing campers onto certain parts of the their property. Kind of similar to the arrangements on private land that were available during the recent eclipse. Ranches with a fishing stream, or small lake, or hiking trails on them would cost more per day.

(Oooops....I guess I forgot about lawyers.)

We've camped over sixty nights so far in 2017 - all of them on public Federal lands. Not once has a ranger dropped by our campsite to inquire about our visit or make a suggestion for things to do in the area. I seldom even see them riding through the campground. Contact has been limited to campfire talks by interpretive personnel or administrative functions by volunteers. it seems the current generation of rangers see themselves only in a LEO capacity. Maybe a little more interaction with the public would reduce the need to get the ticket book out.

As to passes to limit and control use, they were and are an abysmal failure at Cape Hatteras National Seashore.

Those of us who responsibly enjoy our public lands can help as well. If you don’t feel comfortable telling someone to pick up their trash, stay on the trail, quit harassing wildlife etc., at least notify the authorities of their behavior.

We'd have to buy and display a pass. The rangers would range, checking for passes. Folks who had no pass would get a ticket. This idea would not work unless the forests can hire more rangers.

Yes, there would be scofflaws. They would go without a pass and take their chances, as do folks who fail to pay for annual DMV license plate stickers, as do the folks who drive without insurance or valid driver's licenses. The fact that enforcement would be imperfect is not a sufficient reason to avoid all regulation. As they say, the best is the enemy of the good.

Is this a bit of a hassle? Yes. But it would help in reducing the abuse of public land by careless people, wouldn't it? I guess that is the key question. If my suggestion would accomplish nothing, it is a bad idea, by definition. If it would cost a fortune to implement, it is a bad idea. If it would bar all lower-income folks, it is a bad idea.

But there can be a balance between costs and benefits, I think. Otherwise, the government will someday protect the forests by simply excluding us, at any price. That would be tragic, at least to me.

pnichols wrote:
Dan,

How would boondocking fees be collected?

Boondock campers can of course be all over the place in the wilderness, with several different routes to get to some of these areas. If there already aren't enough rangers out there now, I can't see rangers being able to track down anywhere near all the boondockers who might be spread out all over the place so that fees could be collected on the spot. Wouldn't all possible entrance points have to be gated and manned to collect boondocker fees? What about 4X4 RV boondockers who could sneak into many areas without even using a legitimate entrance point?

It seems to me that there could be so much getting around the fees that it would be more hassle than it would be worth it to even try and collect them .... except from us honest boondock campers who would always pay them, as usual, while at the same time thousands of others would not be paying them. Probably the "undesirables" that mess up the camping sites would still be getting away with it at no significant cost to themselves.

I agree. I've said it a few dozen times, I've never seen a BLM Ranger in the wild. I don't think it would be aimed at us but at the people who use the BLM campgrounds. Hell, I'm surrounded by BLM and AZ state land. Am I going to have to pass a checkpoint every time I come home? That said, I do buy AZ State Trust permits every year just to help out a little. As far as I know, I've never camped on AZ Trust land.

LS

Dan,

How would boondocking fees be collected?

Boondock campers can of course be all over the place in the wilderness, with several different routes to get to some of these areas. If there already aren't enough rangers out there now, I can't see rangers being able to track down anywhere near all the boondockers who might be spread out all over the place so that fees could be collected on the spot. Wouldn't all possible entrance points have to be gated and manned to collect boondocker fees? What about 4X4 RV boondockers who could sneak into many areas without even using a legitimate entrance point?

It seems to me that there could be so much getting around the fees that it would be more hassle than it would be worth it to even try and collect them .... except from us honest boondock campers who would always pay them, as usual, while at the same time thousands of others would not be paying them. Probably the "undesirables" that mess up the camping sites would still be getting away with it at no significant cost to themselves.

Sigh. Someone has to say this, and it might as well be me . . . .

I have long been in favor of a modest annual boondocking fee, a very unpopular idea. My reasons are (1) to fund better enforcement and (2) to make sure that the folks who boondock have some "skin in the game."

As we all know, there is a percentage of folks -- not the majority -- who abuse public lands (dumping trash and driving off-limits). They are ruining things for the rest of us. Someday boondocking will be illegal everywhere, if we don't do something to screen out a few of the bad guys and ramp up enforcement.

If you have a better idea, I'm all ears. I fully understand that a boondocking fee would be tough on seniors with fixed incomes (which will soon include me). Maybe there would be a lower rate for seniors, just as there is for entrance into the national parks.

Feel free to take shots at my idea. But just doing nothing and maintaining the status quo is a very poor solution to a growing problem.

And for the same reasons, I am in favor of reasonable fees for all public land use. Not prohibitive fees, but proportional. We can no longer expect that someone else will pay for our use of public resources.