The following editorial appeared in the Red Rock News on December 10, 1999.
The Sedona Ranger District of the Coconino National Forest will be charging user fees sometime this spring to anyone using the forest.
We think it's wrong.
The research report generated for the ranger district supposedly supports the charging of user fees.
We disagree.
According to the report, people prefer not to pay a user fee. The report also says that visitors want a free use area.
If they are forced to pay, tourists want the money used to protest natural resources. What did they expect the people being surveyed to say, that they want the money usd to send everyone to Mexico for a two-week vacation?
Every resident of this country who pays taxes to the federal government is already paying to support public lands and Forest Service projects. Just because the Forest Service does not believe it is getting enough money to support its projects, it wants us to pay for taking a walk in the woods.
They want to issue us passports. That is a great word for saying that they want to tax us more. Charging a fee fore a governmental service is just the same as a tax, it just has a different name.
The Sedona Ranger District wants to build a multi-million-dollar ranger station south of the Village of Oak Creek, in an area that is more pristine than Red Rock Crossing.
The district needs the user fees to offset the operating cost of its district headquarters and for other forest enhancements.
The district wants to stop everyone entering the forest on Hwy. 179 and Hwy. 89A so they can get a passport. This will allow users to pay a fee to walk, hike, ride a bike or take a drive in the forest. The most popular activity or taking a walk, according to the forest survey.
The proposed ranger station would be partially funded by the sale of the current station and legislation to do so is making its way through Congress.
Part of the passport package the ranger district wants to develop includes a one-stop shopping atmosphere for all the tourist, much like a Disneyland concept.
Once people stop by the Forest Service office, they will be asked if they want to buy a Jeep tour package, a hiking trip, travel maps or perhaps, a mountain biking tour. Many of these trips will be led by a district ranger. The ranger district wants the tourist to have a one-stop shopping experience at tax-dollar sponsored facility.
We think that Americans pay more than their fair share to support the Forest Service already. If they want more money, they need to convince their bosses that their need is greater than someone else's need within the Forest Service and get some additional money shifted to their budget.
For some reason nearly everyone in government believes that if they need more money they can just go to the citizenry and lay claim to another junk of one's paycheck.
Sure this is a time of affluence for many people, but not all. There are just as many people living on restricted incomes now as there ever have been. That restricted income could be the monthly Social Security check or the weekly paycheck. The result is the same for most people: there is only so much money to go around.
We also think that charging additional fees for travelling on forest lands and just taking a walk will have serious consequences for this community's economy. The charging of fees will result in fewer people staying in motels, eating in restaurants and just generally spending their money in the greater Sedona area. A one-stop shopping atmosphere could result in fewer visitors to the Uptown area and other parts of town.
The reduction may only be 10 or 15 percent, but even that would hurt city government and businesses. It could also be much more. City and now county government depends on sales tax dollars from tourism to pay the bills of this community.
Charging user fees is an ill-conceived idea whose time has not come for this area. Residents and visitors should not have to pay to visit a national forest.
This project will go forward as fast as it can be pushed if residents do not express their opinions on these proposals.
The time for that expression is now.
- Thomas L. Brossart
Managing Editor