HikeArizona.COM

Going the way of the Red Rock Pass, the 9th Circuit today ruled that charging to park along the Catalina Highway is illegal.

Forest Service Fees under attack!

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/court-r ... 963f4.html

Fair Use Exerpt:

PHOENIX — A federal appeals court on Thursday slapped down the U.S. Forest Service for charging fees for those who want to park and hike in the Catalina Mountains.
Judge Robert Gettleman, writing for the court, said the justification used by the federal agency to impose the fees is not only directly contrary to the law but that its arguments are “illogical.” And the court rejected the agency’s contention that even if it cannot charge for parking, it can do so for hiking and camping.

The ruling... overturns a ruling two years ago by a trial judge that the Forest Service was within its rights to charge $5 a day or $20 a year to those who park along the 28-mile Mount Lemmon Highway....

Beyond that, the judge said federal law “clearly contemplates that individuals can go to a place offering facilities and services without using the facilities and services and without paying a fee.”
For example, he said, the law precludes charging someone who walks, boats, rides or hikes through the forest without using the facilities and services.

azbackpackr wrote:

nonot wrote:Is it true, official, and already in place - no more Catalina fee for climbing, hiking, backpacking, canyoneering, etc?

Just to be exact, those things never cost a dime. It was parking on FS property that cost money. If somehow you could get there on foot, everything was free. It was a vehicle fee.

Excerpted from: http://www.fs.fed.us/passespermits/docs ... elines.pdf

These guidelines support the Forest Service recreation vision and key objectives set forth in the National Recreation Agenda and reflect the requirements an d intent of the 2004 Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (REA). The overarching philosophy of the recreation program is to provide the public with Forest recreationopportunities funded primarily with Federal tax dollars, recreation fees, and support from partners, grants, and other non-appropriated sources.
The types of activities and services that should be funded with appropriations and those that should be funded in part or entirely by recreation fees have not been articulated clearly in the past. This lack of clarity has resulted in inconsistency where fees were charged which understandably caused confusion and concern by the visiting public. Of particular concern were day-use sites, including trailheads, picnic areas, and observation sites which make up a significant portion of the Forest Service’s recreation opportunities.

To address these concerns, Congress (through the REA) has provided specific direction on where fees should not be charged. Further, Congress mandated that the public have free access to a variety of recreation opportunities and undeveloped public lands. The Act also requires agencies to “establish the minimum number of recreation fees and shall avoid the collection of multiple or layered recreation fees for similar uses, activities, or programs.”
The enactors expect a reduction in the number of standard amenity recreation fee sites.

On page 7 of 33 you will see a list of the actions where a fee will NOT be charged (or is not SUPPOSED, legally, to be charged

Category 1

(no recreation fee)

Services and facilities for which no fee can be charged
(benefit society as a whole):
• General access
• Pass-through travel by car, foot, boat, or horse (think Mt. Lemmon, etc.)
• Scenic overlooks and pullouts
• Wayside exhibits
• Parking only
• Dispersed areas with low or no investment
• Information centers at administrative offices
• Right-of-access permitted hunting & fishing access (Like parking along 89A to fish (with a license) in Oak Creek
• Extra services for needs of disabled
• Facility entry & use of standard amenity fee sites and services for persons under 16 & education.

Further, excerpted from: 3(d) 1 of http://www.fs.fed.us/passespermits/fee- ... tml#twelve

(d) Limitations on Recreation Fees.--

(1) PROHIBITION ON FEES FOR CERTAIN ACTIVITIES OR SERVICES.--The Secretary shall not charge any standard amenity recreation fee or expanded amenity recreation fee for Federal recreational lands and waters administered by the Bureau of Land Management, the Forest Service, or the Bureau of Reclamation under this Act for any of the following:

(A) Solely for parking, undesignated parking, or picnicking along roads or trailsides.

(B) For general access unless specifically authorized under this section.

(C) For dispersed areas with low or no investment unless specifically authorized under this section.

(D) For persons who are driving through, walking through, boating through, horseback riding through, or hiking through Federal recreational lands and waters without using the facilities and services.

(E) For camping at undeveloped sites that do not provide a minimum number of facilities and services as described in subsection (g)(2)(A).

(F) For use of overlooks or scenic pullouts.

(G) For travel by private, noncommercial vehicle over any national parkway or any road or highway established as a part of the Federal-aid System, as defined in section 101 of title 23, United States Code, which is commonly used by the public as a means of travel between two places either or both of which are outside any unit or area at which recreation fees are charged under this Act.
(A prime example is SR64 that enters GCNP from the south but then heads east over to Cameron . If just traveling THROUGH GCNP you need not pay the $25 entry)

(H) For travel by private, noncommercial vehicle, boat, or aircraft over any road or highway, waterway, or airway to any land in which such person has any property right if such land is within any unit or area at which recreation fees are charged under this Act.

(I) For any person who has a right of access for hunting or fishing privileges under a specific provision of law or treaty.

(J) For any person who is engaged in the conduct of official Federal, State, Tribal, or local government business.

(K) For special attention or extra services necessary to meet the needs of the disabled.

To put it in a nutshell... You must have a recreational pass to use 11 sites on the Mt. Lemmon Highway. These sites are all considered High Use Recreational Sites which include Marshall Gulch Picnic Area, Molino Basin picnic area, and several other picnic areas. To park over night or do a day hike in these areas you do need the pass...
If it has a picnic table, parking lot, garbage can, toilet it is considered high usage.
You must have the pass to park in Sabino Canyon, and in Madera Canyon at all parking lots.
The recreational pass is $20 for a year or $5 per day.
If you live near The Santa Catalinas or Santa Ritas the yearly pass is the way to go especially if you hike Sabino Canyon/Madera Canyon frequently.
The only trailheads that have picnic areas in the Santa Catalinas are Marshall Gulch and Molino Basin.
I buy a pass with a friend and split the cost since they give two passes, a window sticker and hanging pass.

I wonder how long it will take for them to put a picnic table or trash can at every trailhead, thereby turning it in to a "high use area" and requiring a pass. Will this cause an increase in trail maintenance or improvements to existing trails? If Sedona is an indicator, only the most heavily used trails will see improvements, and any trail that is longer than 1 mile or not crowded on a Saturday in March @ 1100 will not. Oh, and a Fire Engine may be purchased with your "recreation" dollars. I don't know who the FS would give it to, maybe the Town of Summerhaven?

moondancer627 wrote:To put it in a nutshell... You must have a recreational pass to use 11 sites on the Mt. Lemmon Highway.
These sites are all considered High Use Recreational Sites which include Marshall Gulch Picnic Area, Molino Basin picnic area, and several other picnic areas. To park over night or do a day hike in these areas you do need the pass...
If it has a picnic table, parking lot, garbage can, toilet it is considered high usage.
You must have the pass to park in Sabino Canyon, and in Madera Canyon at all parking lots.
The recreational pass is $20 for a year or $5 per day.
If you live near The Santa Catalinas or Santa Ritas the yearly pass is the way to go especially if you hike Sabino Canyon/Madera Canyon frequently.
The only trailheads that have picnic areas in the Santa Catalinas are Marshall Gulch and Molino Basin.
I buy a pass with a friend and split the cost since they give two passes, a window sticker and hanging pass.

#1 - The gub'ment takes your compliance as a vote in FAVOR of the shake-down system. (Which is OK if that is your intent)

#2 - The term the USFS uses is High Impact Use Area. Problem is... they INVENTED it - it is found nowhere in the Federal law and it is illegal to charge for it if the area in question does not meet the criteria already outlined in the REA. It is merely another case of arrogance on behalf of the USFS doing as they dam[sic] well please, ignoring the law(s) in pursuit of the almighty $$, ignoring not just Federal law, but their own mission statement at the same time. Heidi Schewel is leading the way.

Hikers - Become and STAY informed - Do NOT take the word of our 'so called' officials.

Even the Judges saw through the arrogant, feeble smoke-and-mirrors of the USFS.

From the 9th Circuit..."By ignoring the plain text, the Forest Service arrives at an interpretation that would enable an end-run around the clear statutory restrictions. If the REA gave the agency complete discretion to dictate a fee's so-called purpose, then the agency could entirely evade the prohibition on parking fees by simply declaring that its fees are “for” something else too."(pause quote) Oh, gee; they wouldn't do that; would they? (resume quote) "At any of the places where subsection (f) contemplates recreation fees, it is possible for a visitor to do something more than park a car—take photos of a volcano, make a cell phone call, chew a piece of gum—and a visitor must use a facility or service to be subject to a subsection (g) fee. Therefore, the agency could simply say that its parking fee is also “for” those other activities.13 Because the REA has a plain meaning that does not lead to an absurd result, we have no need to afford deference to the agency's competing, nonsensical interpretation See Lamie v. United States Trustee, 540 U.S. 526, 538 (2004). It is clear that the Forest Service cannot charge a fee from someone who does nothing other than park."

Read pages 1440-1441, etc.http://www.westernslopenofee.org/pdfupl ... manded.pdf or more HERE > http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1593849.html
-
-
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

Margaret Mead

@hikeaz
Yes, the bits you cited sure come off like sophistry to justify apparent overreach. I'll be very disappointed if this leads back to previous situation, especially in the Supes.