U.S. Forest Service closures

Agreed. The quality of the journalism was sad indeed.

The comments show far more intelligence and truly address some of the issues and the irresponsibility of the campers causing this problem.

I saw nothing wrong with the quality of journalism, unique but not bad! Perhaps it was the message that was not well received! It seems that all of us can reach our own and perhaps differing interpretation of the articles intent! memtb

The purpose of the Forest Service is not camping. As a courtesy it permits camping but in reality camping should not cost the service one cent which would undermine it purpose.

As for the reporting it is clear that many journalists expect to be treated as though they are special. One can see that even at the city council meetings etc. In reality they should be looked at as no more or less than a member of the public. They should not be allowed to roam the room for photos nor seated at the secretary desk. Essentially they need to be put in their place.

Whomever wrote it, that is an opinion piece - an Ed Op - sprinkled with facts in an attempt to give it more meat than it deserves.

Journalists true to the profession write only facts. One side or both sides depending on the subject and slant.

Too much opinion in this piece - altho the actual facts in it do make a statement about our forests and the use and misuse.

For a governmental organization (USFS) to provide so many opportunities for camping and not have it as a “purpose” is incredulous.

I don't think it's a great mystery or conspiracy like the author is ginning up. The USFS, NPS, BLM, & CoE are all part of Federal budget discretionary spending, of which there is very little compared to other spending.

Isn't the park system touted as self sufficient via fees, ostensibly for maintenance and upkeep, not expansion of facilities? IMO, there isn't sufficient revenue for maintenance and upkeep based on appearance and utility of some of the parks/monuments I've visited.

Was there ever sufficient funds, Thomas? Lots was built by the WPA and CCC.

When NFS etc, uses park fees and revenue to clean up and repair damage to the parks and forests thru misuse and uncaring visitors, that leaves very little maintenance funds. NFS needs to make the folks who create the damage repair the damage ... Once that begins heavy enforcement and big enough fines, then it might lessen a bit.

All our national lands provide homes for wildlife and flora, renew resources, as well as offer a natural experience for campers and hikers. Those lands were never meant for the RV world that emerged as RVs became larger and more like homes away from home. And, never meant for the flood of international visitors who vacation here, often make a mess, and leave it for USA to clean up. I'm not totally isolating foreign visitors here either, as we've seen plently of USA folks leave a mess too.

Times change, and we need to roll with it. But we don't necessarily need that 'roll with it' response to include a steam-roller or a bulldozer. When we choose a natural experience, we should become a part of it, not encompase it enmass and defeat the original purpose of NPS and NFS.

The article is from a camping forum, not the media.I like when someone gets to the point. They gave us information we didn't have before. The forest service is tasked with many things such as managing mining and logging leases,recreation and keeping our forests healthy. I enjoy Forest Service Campgrounds and generally think they do a great job. I'd like to know why have they closed so many campgrounds? Was it money or other reasons? I too would like to see more federal campgrounds open.While I enjoy my Senior Pass, I think they could raise their rates a little to cover the costs of campground improvements or even building new campgrounds.

Vote for some new leaders that will spend the money to keep them open. Otherwise pay to camp