In its biggest political coup to date, a group fighting the backcountry fees charged at Great Smoky Mountains National Park has gotten the backing of the Tennessee State House of Representatives.
In a proclamation adopted April 9, the House expressed its "opposition to the imposition of any backcountry camping fees in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park that are not directly associated with the use of amenities or a commercial purpose and strongly urge an immediate appeal of any such imposed fee."
Previously, the Knox County (Tennessee) Commission, as well the commissions in Bradley and Blount counties in Tennessee and Swain County in North Carolina, condemned the fee and called for its repeal.
The backcountry fee of $4 per night per person, with a $20 per person cap per trip, took effect February 13. It is intended by park officials to help streamline and improve the backcountry permitting process and heighten the presence of rangers in the backcountry.
Pinched by an inadequate budget and unable to charge an entrance fee for any of the roughly 9 million yearly visitors, park officials say they see no way of improving visitor services and protecting backcountry resources without charging users who spend the night in the woods.
The park can't charge an entrance fee because the state of Tennessee, when it agreed to transfer land to the federal government for the park, essentially forbade it.
"By condemning and calling for a repeal of this hugely unpopular and specious tax on backcountry users, the State of Tennessee has proven its intent to provide a voice for citizens that was ignored by the National Park Service as evidenced in the public comments that tallied 18-1 in opposition to the fee," said a statement from Southern Forest Watch, a non-profit group organized to lobby for the fee's repeal.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
...one of the two campsites? Funny. They don't want people camping in the backcountry. That is evident. Daywalkers are okay. Backcountry camping? Not so much.
SmokiesBackpacker - why is it they don't want people camping in the backcountry? I'm not sure I understand this point. I often get a vague feeling nps doesn't really like it, but I can't say why. I also even more often get the feeling nps doesnt like Wilderness. So often the rangers will look at me like I really don't know what I am getting into, or maybe really don't know what it's all about. It's like they just don't like the idea. In general terms they seem much more enthusiastic about me watching the park movie. But you seem VERY much set on this idea that they don't want us out there, so I would like to know why.
For the record, I just paid $5 for a permit at Big South Fork NRA and the ranger that got that filled it out for me was very cool. Helpful and knowledgable. first hand type knowledge too....she knew her stuff. Having said that, I still find that i am bothered by backcountry fees because it seems so low impact compared to all other uses except day hiking. But then again, tent camping, pooping, peeing, washing, fire building, cooking, and hanging things from trees does add up, even when practicing LNT. But that is also at the absolute core of our Parks so it seems like it should be already be covered. Of course horse travel is also at the core but there is no way that is as low impact as foot travel. And you could also argue that a 3 day backpacker has less impact than a day hiker driving to and from a trailhead 6 or more times in that same timeframe.
Im on the fence on this, leaning more to the side of backcountry fees being not a good thing.
Scott,
Having backpacking in BSF, I can tell you that the attitude there is different. Of course GRSM is bigger. However, backcountry camping has been on the decline in the Smokies since the 90s. Also, I saw a study that showed that the impact from backcountry campers was negligible. However, this particular study shows that these fees decrease access to the backcountry. I maintain that the backcountry needs to be accessible to boy scout groups, church groups, 20 somethings etc and a $4 fee will be $25 in 10 years., just look at other parks that have allowed this. http://www.westernslopenofee.org/pdfuploads/Fee_Policy_White_Paper.pdf
Horses don't pay a fee and one horse does the damage of 100 hikers. Perhaps more. Horse folks don't backpack. Why would you when you can do 30 miles in a day. The NPS attitude is that humans are the problem in the backcountry. I maintain that humans are the problem on the roads through newfound gap etc. All that money on roads and visitor centers and they target backpackers? It is the epitome of injustice. And we all know why they are targeting backpackers. Because they can. The permit system provides the "vehicle" for revenue generation. Its shooting fish in a barrel. Plus, the NPS likes to treat backcountry campers like undeducated boobs. Shelter stayers are boobs sometimes but backcountry campers don't go out unless they have some modicum of understanding of what they are getting into. Just look at the virtually non existent rescues of tent campers in the Smokies. Every rescue involves some Leconte dayhiker or a shelter stayer. I can only think of one tent camping rescue in the last decade.
They are deed restricted from charging an entrance fee so Ditmanson said, "lookie here, I know how I can raise a quarter million a year!" That is, coincidentally, the amt he makes per year.
SmokiesBackpacker, you stated: "Horses don't pay a fee and one horse does the damage of 100 hikers. Perhaps more. Horse folks don't backpack. Why would you when you can do 30 miles in a day."
Horseback riders pay a fee to camp overnight, just like every other overnight camper. The horse camp fees are clearly stated on the GSMNP here: http://www.nps.gov/grsm/planyourvisit/horsecamps.htm#CP_JUMP_148875
Also, while its true that horseback riders technically don't "backpack" they are often involved in horse packing. Horses are used as pack animals along with burros, mules, and llamas. That's true in numerous national parks across the nation, not just GSMNP. Some of the folks involved in horse packing are the "Back Country Horsemen of America" group, including numerous state and local area chapters like "Back Country Horsemen of North Carolina" and "Back Country Horsemen of East Tennessee" and "Back Country Horsemen of Pisgah Chapter" and "Back Country Horsemen Great Smoky Mountain Chapter." They not only use the trails and ride or horse pack on overnight trips, they also assist in maintaining the horse trails.
ADDED: Well, well, just found this related article on backcountry packing in GSMNP with horses and other pack animals. It was posted last year by Jim Burnett (who is also posting on this thread):
Minimum Impact Stock Use Training at Great Smoky Mountains National Park
/2012/07/minimum-impact-stock-use-training-great-smoky-mountains-national-park10283
SmokiesBackpacker -- You stated: "There is no evidence that Ditmanson obtained input from the RRAC. See sec 3(b)(5). That is a starter. This is from the NPS FLREA code found here."
Okay. I can go with that as a possibility. I have no idea about what he did/did not do regarding the Recreation Resource Advisory Committee. If this is proven to be the case, though, I would think it would trigger Ditmanson' being reprimanded by higher ups and/or starting the reservations systems fee approval process all over again. So, ultimately, GSMNP is likely to end up with a backcountry reservations system and associated fee for that system anyway, because the fee for a reservation system is not illegal. In fact, FLREA states it is indeed legal.
Given new facts, I could change my mind on this. But as of today, my opinion is that the only way to get rid of backcountry reservations fees is to get rid of FLREA. Because FLREA is the very legislation which enables GSMNP and all the other national parks to enact a fee for their respective reservation systems.
For what it's worth, FLREA is up for renewal this year, I believe.
Kurt Repanshek -- thanks. It would be worth seeing what congress does with FLREA this year. Does anyone posting here have further insight on that?