The following editorial appeared in the Pasadena Star-News on April 13, 1999.
County supervisors should oppose the Adventure Pass, which discriminates against low-income folks who want to visit the national forests.
We commend local county Supervisor Michael Antonovich for introducing a resolution supporting our stand on ending the onerous Adventure Pass in the Angeles National Forest. Antonovich heard from a number of constituents who object to the fee, especially low-income families who reported that the $5-per-day $30-per-year fee has priced them out of this natural recreation spot.
We urge all the supervisors to get behind this resolution, expected to be introduced today, and vote in support of it.
This should send a message to the Forest Service and Congress that double taxation of people who use the forest is unfair and unwarranted — particularly today, when the Congress is deciding how to spend record budget surpluses.
While funds for all national forests have been deficient in recent years, the bulk still goes to the bigger-than-life preserves — Yosemite and Yellowstone, for instance — which cater to middle- and upscale campers and hiking buffs. By contrast, the bulk of the visitors to the vast Angeles are working folks who used to enjoy a few hours or a weekend of nature without the extra cost beyond the federal taxes they already pay. Or without worrying about being harassed by a forest ranger.
Some Angeles forest users have written this newspaper to extol the results of the fee. Less trash or better maintained trails has been the most noted improvement. The fees are reasonable, some letter writers said. We agree — if you are comparing this family outing with a day at a theme park or even an evening at the movies. For most of us, $5 represents, as one letter-writer put it, spare change scrounged from the car seats. But there are thousands more who relied on the forest to provide them with a respite from the rigors of sometimes grinding poverty. For them, $5 can mean food or over-the-counter health remedies for their children. For them, there is no longer a pass for forest adventures.
Instead of constantly looking to the public lands to cut spending, our lawmakers must make the national forests a priority. We could easily free up more money for forests by charging higher fees to other users of public lands — industry. Beef producers who graze their herds on public grasslands, timber companies with lucrative salvage contracts and miners, who continue to pay a miniscule amount for access to rich ore deposits, can and should pay increased user fees. U.S. taxpayers have subsidized them long enough.
We are heartened that local leaders are joining our crusade against this fee and recommend that they team up with Representatives Bono, Capps, Cook, Emerson and Defazio, who've introduced legislation (HR 786) to do away with the so-called demonstration program. Their efforts — combined with the public's support — can help right this wrong-headed, discriminatory policy.