Well,
I expect that this may be an unpopular point of view…
As
some have mentioned, state trust lands and national forest
lands are public lands, which means that they are owned by the people,
so I can
look upon them as “my” lands, and that is not an incorrect way to
look at them. That immediately brings up the question which has been
raised here in this thread: “Why should I have to pay a fee to use
my own land?”
Just
because it is public land doesn’t mean that it is
free of costs. There are fences, roads, and other facilities to
maintain. There are services, such as law enforcement, wildlife
management,
cleanup, etc. that have to be provided. These things cost money, so
the
next question is: “Who should pay?”
These
costs can be paid for by either a general tax or by user
fees (or a combination of the two). Personally, I have no problem with
the users of these areas bearing a higher proportion of the costs in
the form
of user fees. Why should people with no interest in entering or using
these areas bear the cost so that someone who does use the area can do
so
without paying a fee? Nope, I think it is very fair for those who use
the
areas to pay a fee, and, as the costs go up, so should the fees.
Bill
in Willcox