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