< PREVIOUS ]   [ 1997 Index ]   [ Ed Quillen HOME ]   [ SEARCH ]   [ NEXT >


The real reasons they're starting to charge user fees

Published August 31, 1997 in the Denver Post.
Copyright ©1997 by Ed Quillen. All rights reserved.

A fortnight ago, Martha and I drove up past Placer Creek to Blank's Cabin at the base of Mt. Shavano, and strolled along the Colorado Trail for a couple of hours. Upon our return, I picked up the Sunday Denver Post, wherein I read an article by the Washington Post's regional correspondent which explained that we had just been freeloading.

That is, we were enjoying the benefit of government subsidies as we recreated, and that the day is coming -- indeed, it has already arrived in some places -- when we will be charged for these activities.

Since that wasn't the first such piece I'd read, I figured the zeitgeist was changing, and I'd better get a handle on it. So I called my favorite inside source, Ananias Ziegler, media relations director for the Committee That Really Runs America.

So, are we really freeloaders when we're enjoying ourselves on public land? I asked. After all, we're citizens of the nation that sent out armies and negotiators to take that land from the Utes. Aren't we entitled to benefit from that without paying more?

Ziegler said I was being naive. For one thing, you've got to look at campaign contributions, where Hollywood is a major player.

So what? I wondered.

So, if you're entertaining yourself out in the woods for two hours, you're not spending $7.50 for two hours at a movie.

His logic was impeccable, so I urged him on.

And is it fair for somebody that sunk $100 million into a star-studded action-adventure blockbuster, carefully crafted so as to contain nothing that requires an IQ in triple digits to comprehend, for that patriotic investor to have his own country competing against him for the entertainment dollar?

Well, when you put it that way, it certainly sounds like a raw deal, I agreed.

So that's a big part of this push to charge for enjoying public lands, Ziegler said. Recreation is an industry now, rather than some private pastime, and we've got to make sure there's a level playing field.

It isn't just movies, he continued. When you're out in the woods, you're not watching pay-per-view TV, or buying admission to theme-park rides, or purchasing a best-seller allegedly written by a sports celebrity who probably hasn't even read it. And if you're walking, it's even worse.

Walking is worse? I prodded.

Yes, it's an elitist activity. If you can afford a $30,000 sport-utility vehicle, then you're a wholesome normal American. But if you can only afford a $50 pair of boots, then you're part of the elite, and that's something we can't encourage.

I mulled for a moment. You said the competition for the entertainment dollar was only part of the impetus to charge people for walking on their own land. What's the other part?

Ziegler sighed. As you might have noticed, your little mountain towns have experienced considerable growth lately.

Recalling that it had taken me about 10 minutes to cross D Street to get to the post office that morning, I agreed.

And much of that growth, he explained, comes from upscale people who seek to improve their lifestyles.

Any real-estate ad will tell you that much, I observed.

Well, they like covenanted neighborhoods, he pointed out. And they don't like to see you local low-lifes driving your old beaters, wearing Army surplus instead of designer Gore-Tex, that sort of thing. What's the point of living with a superb view of the majestic Rockies if just anybody can visit the mountains?

I conceded that he had a point.

And so, if we start charging fees, that will keep the riff-raff out of the woods, thereby sparing good upper-bracket citizens the traumatizing spectacle of poor people enjoying themselves. Don't the owners of trophy homes on 50-acre parcels have rights, too?

I suppose they do, I agreed. And so, you guys plan to start charging fees, and then keep raising the fees until only the right sort of people can visit public land?

You got it, Ziegler said.

But shouldn't public land be open to the public? I asked.

It will be -- to the only public that matters these days, he concluded.


< PREVIOUS ]   [ 1997 Index ]   [ Ed Quillen HOME ]   [ SEARCH ]   [ NEXT >