Pay them now -- and later

Post Register editorial board members are Roger Plothow, publisher; J. Robb Brady, publisher emeritus; Marty Trillhaase, Opinions page editor; and Dean Miller, managing editor.

User fees to support recreation programs on the public lands was an experiment. Thanks to an underhanded maneuver in Congress, they're now more or less permanent.

Launched during the Clinton era -- and subsequently extended over the years -- the so-called "fee demo" program was supposed to augment depleted recreation budgets. That made sense. If Congress wasn't going to fund those programs, the choice came down to leaving trails, campgrounds or boat launches in a perennial state of disrepair or asking users to help support them.

Besides, the public is accustomed to paying fees at Yellowstone and other national parks.

Unfortunately, the program remains flawed. About a third of the money raised in fees goes back to Washington to pay administration costs. Nor has the government kept its end of the bargain. As recreationists pay more, the government is putting its money elsewhere. Last year, the Bush administration budget called for a 13 percent increase on the forest firefighting budget. It increased spending on recreation by about 1 percent.

Yes, the National Park Service charges user fees. But you won't find logging, mining or cattle grazing on the national parks. All exist on the national forests and all expect the taxpayer to subsidize them.

Ranchers graze on public lands for an average of $1.87 per animal unit month, versus $15 on private land.

Timber companies get free roads and other concessions.

And a 19th century law allows miners to claim a site for as low as $5 per acre. They pay no royalties for the ore they extract from public lands.

Many of these leases -- from grazing to ski hills -- are treated like private property, with the people paying the bills having little to say about it.

By the same token, recreationists shouldn't expect a free ride. Fees have a rightful place in public lands -- as long as the people paying them get a value in return. Many taxpayers never set foot in a national forest and yet their taxes provide recreation opportunities for others.

But the way to handle these questions about who uses the forests and who should pay is in an open forum. That didn't happen here.

Instead, Rep. Ralph Regula, R-Ohio, considered the front-runner to chair the House Appropriations Committee next year, inserted a last-minute rider into a must-pass $388 billion omnibus budget bill.

That meant no public hearings and no debate. By the time it showed up on the floor, "fee demo" critics such as Idaho Sen. Larry Craig faced an up or down vote on the entire budget.

It gets worse. Anybody who violates this law -- say, he blows off paying a $5 trailhead fee -- could face penalties of $5,000 and six months in jail.

This legislation comes with baggage that could provide special privileges for new "public-private partnerships" to provide visitor services. However reasonable that may sound, it sets the stage for trouble later on. The American Recreation Coalition, made up of the largest corporations involved in tourism, is gaining influence over how the public uses its own land and how much it may pay for the privilege.

Today, even those who support the concept of user-based fees are unhappy with the way Congress extended the program. And those who have been skeptical about those fees all along have reason to say, "We told you so."

- J. Robb Brady