"Healthy Forests" bait and switch?

hanson hanson at quick.net
Thu Mar 4 13:05:05 EST 2004


"Larry Harrell" <lhfotoware at hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7a90c754.0403040549.6a4f8c at posting.google.com...
> "hanson" <hanson at quick.net> wrote in message
news:<raw1c.20425$aT1.7363 at newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> > Things are so fucked up with this forest stuff, in large
> > part because of the enviro turds, who with their mania for
> > permit charges and user fees have disturbed an originally
> > pretty well working environmental and administrative system.
> > It got so bad that even Disneyland got into the act and intends
> > to administer the National Forests (Not Parks) but only if
> > USFS will deliver them a fee collection system in place, the
> > (1996 Fee Demo legislation) with user-fees amounting for
> > anybody to pay $5.- for walking cross country in any Nat.
> > Forest where there are NO Govt. improvements nor any
> > govt. services. IOW pay to walk on your own public lands!
> >
> > This is in part what I wanted to address Larry about a few
> > days ago in another post.       -----         hanson
> >
>
[Larry]
> While I am all for forest users to pay for their uses of the National
> Forests,

[hanson]
Watch how you phrased your sentence. You give the impression
that you, USFS, owns these forests. But unless you're mad, Larry,
....it's their uses....of THEIR National Forests: THEIRS, not yours.
THEIRS are the tax payers, the people of the US, not the USFS.
Forests? What have you, USFS, done in the unimproved wilderness
areas, for any visitor, that he uses, which you have spent US tax$
for?

[Larry]
>I'm not a big fan of the Demo fee. I think that if a forest
> user parks in a designated and developed parking area or visits an
> interpretive site, etc, they should have to pay a fee.

[hanson]
Yes, charge for use of campgrounds, toilets or nature walks etc,
for amenities that you, USFS, developed and built. That is fair.

The following paragraphs are observations and comments applying
to US-Hwy 2 over the Gabriels from La Cañada to Wrightwood.

BUT, do NOT rip off people by extorting $5 via a green shit user-fee
for parking at roadside parking spots that the Hyw dudes developed,
built and maintain with moneys from users' gasoline taxes.
That is illegal double taxation you are doing, a criminal shake down
along USHwy 2 over the Gabriels from La Cañada to Wrightwood.

BUT do NOT rip off people by extorting $5 via a green shit user-fee
for walking on THEIR publicly owned, wild, unimproved land, "cross
country style" in National Forests (NOT Parks) where there are no
government amenities or services available nor desired. Your Forest-
Adventure fee for hiking cross country is a criminal shake down.

BUT do NOT rip off people by extorting $5 via a green shit user-fee
for walking on publicly owned, wild, unimproved land, "on trails that
were built and maintained by volunteers and child labor" in
National Forests (NOT Parks). Your Forest-Adventure fee for hiking
on trails is a criminal shake down, unless you pay me and all the other
volunteers back wages for having done your, (= USFS's) work.

To add insult to injury, you government goons who do not pay for any
volunteer trail works, etc. DO gladly give 20-30% of this fee away to the
private bastards that sell it for you. = $$Enviromentalism$$ in action =

BTW, have you noticed that since the Demo-fee is on, hikers no longer
fix and maintain the trail system and no longer pick up trash --- AND
NEITHER DO YOU, USFS, who promised to do so for the five bucks.
Now, it's full of litter & all night drunk parties are held in Miller's tunnel.
=== It is not a Healthy Forest any longer since the Fee-Demo ===

To continue with my rant,
what is this machination that USFS quietly did, when handing over
the public property of Redbox station (Hyw 2/Wilson) to a few Indians?
My tax$ paid for that. How come the Indians ended up with these
buildings including waterflush toilets, --  yet the paying, visiting public
got the use of two stinking Portapotties (no toilet paper) in the middle
of the US-Hyw parking lot? -- What shenanigans went down here?

[Larry]
> Paying to hike on a low to medium usage
> trail should not have to happen, IMHO.

[hanson]
Then tell them so. Get rid of it for that. You are on the inside.
You have some influence there. To boot, this being an election
year....the candidate that grabs this Fee-Demo issue and gets
rid of it will assure himself the votes of 6-10 million people.
It's is not the $5 that is so aggravating... it's the way that this
program is handled -- See details on the resp. websites like
http://www.wildwilderness.org/
http://www.freeourforests.org/

[Larry]
> Enforcement of this Demo fee takes a nice little chunk out of the
> funds generated and partially defeats the purpose of the fee. Those
> who do choose to buy a yearly pass should have some kind of "VIP
> status" when visiting popular areas.
> I can't say that the original system worked all that well. All
> previous administrations have mismanaged our National Forests, in one
> way or another, depending on the political pendulum. Isn't it about
> time to restore them back towards their original functioning state?
>
> Larry,    angry American citizen

hanson, ripped off American citizen, angrier

>
PS:
[hanson]
I partially followed your issues about thinning the forest patches
from dead trees in the Wrightwood area. Flying in, recently, and
catching that view, making a few turns over it, because it looked
so ugly, why is there a problem for not cutting down & thinning the
forest? I'll give you my opinion about it after you tell me what you'll
do to get rid of the Adventure Pass Fee along Highway 2.




More information about the Ag-forst mailing list