Two defiant hikers, Mr. Larry Auxter of
Mt. Shasta, California, and Mr. Steve Ankrum of Bend, Oregon had been scheduled
to appear before U.S. Magistrate Craig Kellison in Redding, California. They had
both been hiking beyond the 10,000 foot mark on Mt. Shasta without the required
forest pass. On Thursday (1/21), Mr. Ankrum received a call from the Forest
Service notifying him that his case had been dismissed. Mr. Auxter received a
letter from the Forest Service notifying him that his case would be dismissed
"in the interest of justice."
Neither Mr. Auxter, nor Mr. Ankrum had purchased the Forest Service permit. Both Auxter and Ankrum have been actively engaged in opposing the Forest Service's Recreation Fee Demonstration Program. For weeks, Auxter and Ankrum had been quoted in the press as saying they would vigorously fight their hiking tickets.
The dismissal of their cases before being heard in court came as a total surprise to both men. Duane Lyon, spokesman for the Shasta-Trinity National Forest, declined to say why the charges against Auxter and Ankrum were dismissed.
In January of this year, the Department of
Interior (Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Fish & Wildlife
Service) and the Department of Agriculture (Forest Service) gave their
Recreational Fee Demonstration Program
report to
Congress for fiscal year 1998. The Forest Service report has numerous
problems, and it has been shown in the past, through a
Freedom of Information Act request
and a General Accounting Office report,
that the agency often uses unorthodox accounting methods or even bends the facts
to make for a favorable report to Congress.
The Forest Service continues to fail to report any resistance to the program, ignoring resolutions by California, three California counties, two California cities, legislation to end the program, and the activities of numerous activist organizations who oppose the program including the Sierra Club. Within the report, the Forest Service even admits that "fee demonstration receipts do not meet all local needs. Appropriated dollars and other resources, such as concessions and volunteers, remain critical in helping to meet total needs." Such an admission supports the very opposition that the Forest Service fails to recognize.
Regardless of the failure to address the problem of widespread opposition to the program, the poor accounting by the agency, and the admission that the program cannot fix the recreation funding problems, the number one recommendation by the agencies is to make the program permanent next year.