Let’s Get Businesslike With Federal Lands

[SAJ-99]

Can you provide a link? Because like I said, I've never seen a study that attempted to quantify in dollars and cents the value of a public land user day.

There have been plenty of attempts to describe that value qualitatively, which is probably the better metric anyway, but I've never read anything about applying monetary value to those trips. You could argue that you shouldn't ever try to put a dollar amount on a spring hike in the wildflowers, or catching a cutthroat in a crystal clear alpine tarn, or scrambling to the top of a peak. But when the opposition speaks no other language, and wields all the power, then by god we'd better learn how to speak their language.

Here is the Google AI total...
According to recent USDA Forest Service data, the estimated annual number of visitor days on National Forest Service land is around 168 million visits, with a 90% confidence interval ranging from 164.5 million to 172 million visits.

You ask a good question that is hard to answer. Placing a value is hard when money is not exchanged. What value can you equivocate to those days in the outdoors? For some, the outdoors is a religious experience. For others, it is the equivalent to a visit to the psychologist. There is certainly value. The probably may also be that those who substitute the outdoors for other activities, like a Mariners game, don't have the money for the game.

 

[Chama Grande]

I am headed down to the Gila/San Francisco River for a week of stream gaging. Some of my gages are on public, some are on private, and all are diverting water that began as snow/rain on public watersheds.

New Study Finds Wild Gila and San Francisco Rivers Greatly Contribute to Local Economy

Commentary: Water related outdoor recreation in New Mexico’s Gila River and San Francisco River watersheds stimulates economic activity that supports at…

www.krwg.org

 

[Rie Bread]

you know what costs tax payers, war. Let DOGE the #*^@#* outta that

 

[Rie Bread]

Everyone needs to re-read Desert Solitaire, by Edward Abbey.

It's about the soul of America. I've already posted about ways to increase revenues for National Parks, but that's just to stop the bleeding of dollars; they already sold out. Abbey explains it well. Having sold out to Industrial Tourism, might as well maximize National Park's income ( and rolling over in his grave, wherever it is, Cactus Ed, Park Ranger at Arches Natural Money Mint is surely doing so).

The rest, save it in its natural state.

I co-founded a chapter of the Sierra Club, and carried their cup proudly, but we need to re-focus.

Foot, horse, llama, and mule travel only in USFS.

Abby is a hack man. Made up stories of idealism. Same with jack karowake. Complete hyperbole line of story telling.

 

[Rie Bread]

You’re 90% right. Having worked in the backcountry in both parks and wilderness areas, there are areas in National Parks that are far more wild and less visited than large wilderness areas. But for the most part that statement is correct.

10% of the national park lands receive 90% of the impact

 

[Rie Bread]

This has been done. Many times in the past 30 years. And it never gets legs because as The_Jim says, most people are so disconnected from the outdoors they simply don't care.

I've seen the value of public lands promoted by lots of organizations, the value of birdwatchers, the value of sportsmen and women, the value of fishing, etc... Not sure who the audience is really supposed to be. Select members of congress maybe, but I have never once in my life had a conversation with another person about what value any of these things actually have.

We now have at least 3 generations that grew up with gov subsidized outdoor recreation, going all the way back to the CCC and WPA days. Free camping, free infrastructure, free, free, free. All because the nation was coming out of a great depression and people needed to be put to work. Now all that infrastructure is crumbling and the labor and materials are no longer cheap. The chickens have finally come home to roost, and the people in power don't understand the problem because none of that has ever cost them a dime.

Great take.

 

[NDGuy]

“Doug Burgum, President Trump’s secretary of the interior, explained that the nation’s parks, public lands, and natural resources—including timber, fossil fuels, and minerals—are assets on “the nation’s balance sheet.” Burgum speculated in his confirmation hearing that federal lands could be worth as much as $200 trillion. He argued that the U.S. government, run like a business, should know the value of the corporation’s assets and use those assets “to get a return for the American people.” Under Trump’s proposal, the value of public lands would be determined by their potential market value to grow an SWF, and not by their value to hunters and fishermen; family ranchers; and communities that rely on clean water and air as well as jobs and income that come from natural resource development, recreation, and tourism.“

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/trump-quietly-plans-to-liquidate-public-lands-to-finance-his-sovereign-wealth-fund/

 

[antlerradar]

“Doug Burgum, President Trump’s secretary of the interior, explained that the nation’s parks, public lands, and natural resources—including timber, fossil fuels, and minerals—are assets on “the nation’s balance sheet.” Burgum speculated in his confirmation hearing that federal lands could be worth as much as $200 trillion. He argued that the U.S. government, run like a business, should know the value of the corporation’s assets and use those assets “to get a return for the American people.” Under Trump’s proposal, the value of public lands would be determined by their potential market value to grow an SWF, and not by their value to hunters and fishermen; family ranchers; and communities that rely on clean water and air as well as jobs and income that come from natural resource development, recreation, and tourism.“

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/trump-quietly-plans-to-liquidate-public-lands-to-finance-his-sovereign-wealth-fund/

Not sure I am buying the 200 trillion number. That is enough money to pay off the national debt and give everyone in the country close to half a million. That is some scary shit if you think about it.

 

[Southern Elk]

Not sure I am buying the 200 trillion number. That is enough money to pay off the national debt and give everyone in the country close to half a million. That is some scary shit if you think about it.

If my math is correct that’s $312,500 per acre at 640 million acres total. Something is way off

 

[seeth07]

Not sure I am buying the 200 trillion number. That is enough money to pay off the national debt and give everyone in the country close to half a million. That is some scary shit if you think about it.

This always has helped me put those big numbers into perspective:

One million seconds is about 11 days, 13 hours.
One billion seconds is about 31 years and 8 months.
One trillion seconds is about 31,710 years.

 

[Gulf of America]

If my math is correct that’s $312,500 per acre at 640 million acres total. Something is way off

Doug must be using the same inflation factor Trump used on his businesses to pretend he was more successful than he actually was.

 

[antlerradar]

If my math is correct that’s $312,500 per acre at 640 million acres total. Something is way off

Yup. Maybe some of the stuff near Jackson, Aspen and Yosemite is going to sell for that much or more. Most is going to bring far less.

The scary part is even if you use a more reasonable figure like the 1 1/2 trillion I have heard somewhere, you could give everyone in the country better than four grand. I am thinking most people would take the money.

 

[NDGuy]

Yup. Maybe some of the stuff near Jackson, Aspen and Yosemite is going to sell for that much or more. Most is going to bring far less.

The scary part is even if you use a more reasonable figure like the 1 1/2 trillion I have heard somewhere, you could give everyone in the country better than four grand. I am thinking most people would take the money.

folksthink inflation is bad now..

 

[antlerradar]

folksthink inflation is bad now..

Nice thought, but probably not that inflationary. Sure you would be giving people one and a half trillion, but you would also be taking one and a half trillion from other people.

 

[D_Walt]

If my math is correct that’s $312,500 per acre at 640 million acres total. Something is way off

And 640 million acres is only 1.8 acres per US citizen…it’s a damn good thing most citizens don’t recreate on our National Forests. There’s an awful lot of citizens that perceive they get 0 benefit from public lands - our task is how do we convince the vast majority of of our fellow citizens that it is in their interest to keep in perpetuity an asset that yields them no tangible return. Probably an easier sell in the West to convince folks it’s for the greater good, but there’s an awful lot of congressmen whose constituents do not perceive they get any benefits from public lands.

I.e. Texas has more congressmen than NM, CO, WY, MT, ID, UT, AZ & NV combined. And maybe 1 in 20 people here in either side of the isle care about or use public lands at all. Of course the Senate is quite the equalizer…good thing we’re a Republic and not a true Democracy.

 

[TX Trophy Hunter]

There’s an awful lot of citizens that perceive they get 0 benefit from public lands - our task is how do we convince the vast majority of of our fellow citizens that it is in their interest to keep in perpetuity an asset that yields them no tangible return.

I think that would be a losing battle. An option that would be more business like that I believe would be reasonable would be for the agencies to rely more on non appropriated funds, aka non taxpayer revenue generated from visitor fees. For this to work, those of us that get more use out of federal lands than say our friends back east are going to need to pony up a lot more on things like public land access passes. Our outfitters are going to need to pay more for their permits and pass those costs on to their rich clients. Ranchers need to pay a more fair price for their allotments and so on. This is all stuff that I loathe but the world we live in is changing rapidly. Also the first thing that needs more funding is law enforcement. Our forests are being absolutely raped by the bad players in the ohv crowd and others.

 

[Treeshark]

This is all stuff that I loathe

You bring up valid points and an interesting solution, but why would you loathe that? Seems fair to me.

 

[TX Trophy Hunter]

You bring up valid points and an interesting solution, but why would you loathe that? Seems fair to me.

I hate the fact that as a child growing up on the boundary of a national forest I could always go explore thousands of acres without having to pay for access, and that any family could do the same without having money be a barrier to entry, and that’s going to change. The start up costs for becoming an outfitter, grazing permit holder and everything else under my example will make it harder for those not born with a silver spoon in hand to participate.

 

[dranrab]

We already tax fishing equipment, that was passed in 1950, Dingell-Johnson act for the exact purpose of what you're talking about.

When you buy certain fishing tackle, fuel and hunting and shooting equipment, there is an excise tax built into the price you pay. That comes courtesy of two acts. The Dingell-Johnson Sportfish Restoration Act and The Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act.

The Lion's share of the Sport fish Restoration Act (SRA) money comes from a tax on fuel. There is a small tax on all fuel sold in each state. It's assumed that a portion of all fuel sold in a state goes into the registered motor boats in each state. That money goes into the SRA fund. The SRA sees funds directed into two primary programs. Some of the funds go to the Department of Interior to be used for boating infrastructure, coastal wetlands protection, Fish and Wildlife Service administrative support and more. Many of your public boat launches were funded in part through this program. Some of the funds go to the US Coast Guard for State Recreational Boating Safety Programs.

The portion that goes to the Coast Guard is spent in 3 primary ways. The vast majority is distributed to the state's to be used for equipment, enforcement, training, SAR etc. 5% goes to a grant program to support Non-Governmental Organizations.

 

[dranrab]

This thread got me to thinking a little bit. Who among us balks at paying for our federal duck stamp. I'd venture to say none. If there were a Federal Lands Access Pass requirement for access to ANY federal wildlands, that could be an incredible source of funds. Some 325,000 million visit National Parks each year. Let's just say there are another 75 million who don't visit NPs but do use refuges, national forests and BLM lands. That's 400,000,000. Sell a $20 pass that lasts for three years. Let's say 25% are under the age of 12, so no pass required. 300,000,000 x 20 is 600,000,000 or 200,000,000 per year. Is that enough to make a positive difference? Would anyone balk over $7 per year to access our national treasures?