OCR Text |
Show We recommend further that in addition to the general use fee, fees should be collected for the use of developed recreation areas constructed at Federal cost. The Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission recommended such a system of fees, and generally they are being collected. The vast majority of the states make charges for the use of campsites and various other facilities. Fees for the use of facilities should be varied according to the quality offered, conditions of use, and comparability with charges for non-Federal recreation facilities, if any, in the vicinity. However, we do not believe that any fees of this nature should be levied on the basis of "what the market will bear" so as to bar the use of any facilities to those who cannot afford a high fee. The Commission is further convinced that the public generally is basically honest and will pay both general use and facility user fees if they know that such fees are required. It is not necessary to have a large policing force. For the majority widespread dissemination of information concerning the program for the collection of fees will suffice; for the remainder it will be sufficient to know that-as in the case of a fishing license or motor vehicle operator's permit- if you are stopped by an official the failure to have it on your person will subject you to a penalty. We recommend that a penalty be imposed for failure of a recreation user to have the permit in his possession on the public lands. Conflicts Over Uses Recommendation 82: Statutory guidelines should be established for resolving and minimizing conflicts among recreation uses and between outdoor recreation and other uses of public lands. Some of the sharpest public policy issues in recent years have arisen as a result of real or alleged conflicts between various recreation values and other uses of public lands, or between one and another type of recreation use. Most of those conflicts appear to fall in one of two categories: (1) conflict between the complete preservation of a relatively large area of land primarily for the purpose of maintaining the environmental status quo, and any type of use or development that disturbs, or would change, that environment; and (2) conflicts between recreation and other uses, or among different types of recreation, on lands where total preservation of a large environment is not the objective. We believe that the statutory promulgation of meaningful guidelines for handling those conflicts or preventing them is essential to a more orderly and intensive administration of public lands in the future. All nonconforming uses in national parks, monuments, and historic sites should be prohibited by statute. Mining, logging, overhead power line construction, high speed highways, industrial plants, dam construction, and other land uses that would alter or destroy the unique values for which these federally administered areas are created are generally prohibited by the statute establishing each area, or by the basic authority for the establishment and management of the system. There are exceptions for some types of areas in the National Park System, specifically Glacier Bay, Death Valley, and Organ Pipe Cactus national monuments, and McKinley National Park, where mining is authorized by statute.12 Although attempts to mine in most of these areas appear to be quiescent, the standing statutory provision for such use is an open invitation to conflict. We recommend that these provisions be repealed, and that Congress enact a general statute enumerating the types of uses and activities prohibited in all such areas now in existence or to be created in the future. With respect to outstanding rights, Congress should authorize an active program to acquire such interests upon payment of just compensation to the owners. The Commission believes this action will contribute significantly to reducing conflicts and controversy over the use and administration of these kinds of areas. Areas requiring intensive development and high rates of capital investment should be designated recreation dominant use zones. We believe a standard of this kind is particularly needed for recreation areas on lands administered under general multiple use policies. It covers a variety of outdoor recreation activities, but the primary criteria would be intensity of development and associated rates of capital investment. Ski slopes with advanced tow systems and associated public service facilities, high density resort developments, marinas, trailer courts, and full facility campgrounds are some of the developments that would be given dominant use classification under this policy. Where other potential resource uses arise in these locations, recreation values would be given preference whenever conflicts occur. The extent to which other uses are permitted in the area would be determined by their compatibility with the recreation facility uses. Congress should authorize and provide guidelines for the restricted use zoning of multiple use public lands to protect scenic values. This is in harmony with our general recommendations in Chapter Three. The enjoyment of scenery accounts for a significant amount of current recreation use in the public land areas of the United States. 12 Herman D. Ruth and Associates, Outdoor Recreation Use of the Public Lands, App. II, pp. II B-2 and 3. PLLRC Study Report, 1969. 205 |