Re: Federal Government and Liability

[Teddy Lancaster <Teddy@runningbear.com>]

Don't get me wrong...I NEVER said I object to fees.  BUT, another thing I
learned at the Symposium in SC is that the FHA has over $30,000,000 in funds
available for trails maintenance, development and preservation.  I just need be
applied for. So don;t let YOUR forest ranger give you that excuse.  We were
given a COMPLETE list of FHA phone numbers and people to contact regarding
this.  I even KNOW of people who have done this!!!

Furthermore, there are PLENTY of groups out there looking for "community
service" and they have been used to help maintain and develop trails.

From my end, I see a great deal of rangers sitting on their butts waiting to
collect retirement.  You may not see it where you are, but I sure do here.

Furthermore, the horse people are NOT united... when the AHC states they have
had little interest in the subject, you KNOW most of their members go in
circles...the show and training ring, that is.

There is MORE money in ATV's, Mountain Bikers and Hikers than there is in
horses...so, guess what happens?  In my own Nat'l Forest, they collected 50 user
fees for horsemen this year and 5000 for ATV users.

The squeaky wheel gets oiled...'bout time we started "squeaking: don't you
think?

teddy

Duncan Fletcher wrote:

> Teddy. This, unfortunately, is tails they win, heads we lose proposition. No
> funds and the trails become unrideable - the same group will cheer that.
> That money has had a beneficial effect in Washington. I have a number of
> reservations about fees. But philosophically, I can't argue with the
> concept.  I don't see government as the source of funding the operational
> expenses of my recreation. OTH, if money is going to be spent on other
> recreational projects, we should get our fair share, and the money should be
> spent directly on trails (and trailhead facilities) and should be spent
> efficiently (translated means using chain saws as appropriate instead of
> mucho dollars going to a pair of guys of each end of a misery whip).
>
> I should also admit that on a personal basis, the fee is not costing me
> anything. By virtue of volunteer work (which I was doing prior to the fee
> imposition), I get a free trail pass covering Washington and Oregon.
>
> The liability problem can be (and probably should be) legislated away. One
> of the Ranger districts has asked our help in wording a warning message to
> backcountry equestrian users on the difficulties and dangers of backcountry
> riding, particularly on an inappropriate horse. If I heard correctly there
> were 8 horses lost the past year in that district.
>
> Duncan Fletcher
> dfletche@gte.net
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Teddy Lancaster <Teddy@runningbear.com>
>
> >Then the simple answer is NOT to charge a user fee.  Most states have a
> limited
> >liability policy wherein a landowner is exempt for liability when he allow
> his
> >land to be used for recreation, PROVIDING he does not charge for it (or
> set-up
> >booby traps or neglect to mark off or warn users of a potential known
> danger).
> >
> >Teddy
> >