[pct-l] Simply parking in a National Forest does notrequireapermit

[James Vesely]

I may be wrong but it looks like the ruling goes beyond just parking to include specific language "contains all of the following amenities" before a fee can be imposed.   

I read it as for example, if the area does not have toilet facilities and or a picnic table it cannot impose a fee. 

Jim

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(f) Standard Amenity Recreation Fee-
Except as limited by subsection (d)
,
the Secretary
may charge
a standard amenity recreation fee for Federal recreational lands and waters
under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, or the Forest
Service, but only at the following:
(1) A National Conservation Area.
(2) A National Volcanic Monument.
(3) A destination visitor or interpretive center that provides a broad range of interpretive services,
programs, and media.
(4) An area-
(A) that provides significant opportunities for outdoor recreation;
(B) that has substantial Federal investments;
(C) where fees can be efficiently collected; and
*********(D) that contains all of the following amenities:*****************
(i) Designated developed parking.
(ii) A permanent toilet facility.
(iii) A permanent trash receptacle.
(iv) Interpretive sign, exhibit, or kiosk.
(v) Picnic tables.
(vi) Security services.

-----Original Message-----
From: pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net [mailto:pct-l-bounces at backcountry.net] On Behalf Of JPL
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 1:38 PM
To: Luce Cruz; pct-l at backcountry.net
Subject: Re: [pct-l] Simply parking in a National Forest does notrequireapermit

Yep.  I think Brick had a pretty good post a few minutes ago...

-----Original Message-----
From: Luce Cruz
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 3:50 PM
To: pct-l at backcountry.net
Subject: Re: [pct-l] Simply parking in a National Forest does notrequireapermit

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:40 PM, JPL <jplynch at crosslink.net> wrote:

> A government agency can charge access fees, its part of their 
> administrative responsibilities to make such decisions under the 
> Constitution.  My local park charges a parking fee.  We may not like 
> it (I don't), but its a significant source of revenue for the agency involved.
>  Whether or not a visitor uses any facilities or not.  And the 
> driveway and parking area are certainly facilities.  I'd be surprised 
> if its not overturned pretty quickly.


So I'm going to guess that many do not know what the requirements are under a law passed by congress that allows the USDA/Forest Service to collect fees and specifically addresses when a fee is or is not legal? Your local park is under a different jurisdiction, but our federal lands are under federal management, and they **must** follow federal law.

http://www.westernslopenofee.org/pdfuploads/Sedona_Meeting_Handout_FLREA_Excerpts.pdf

--