Proposed fees could cripple small businesses using forest land, opponents say

Pauline Arrillaga

Tuesday, Jan. 18, 2000 | 1:48 a.m.

As a boy, Jack Rich loved the tickle of sweat sliding down his nose, its salty flavor on his lips. It was the taste of the wilderness - of collecting firewood and pitching tents as part of his father's outfitting business in western Montana.

These days Rich is the guide, but the sweat is less sweet. It has been soured by yet another proposed governmental fee that would increase his cost of doing business in the forests his family has explored for three generations.

"It's more than just another fee," Rich says. "It's one more nail in the coffin of rural America."

The Rich Ranch is one of thousands of businesses that hold special-use permits granting them access to national forest lands. Now the Forest Service wants those companies to foot the bill to have their permit applications processed and reviewed.

The fees could range from $75 to several thousand dollars, depending on the intended use of the land. Whatever the cost, small operations such as outfitters insist the additional charges would cripple businesses already struggling to survive, forcing owners to pass the burden onto their customers.

"Our people are mostly mom and pop type businesses," says David Brown, executive director of American Outdoors, a trade association representing 500 outfitters and guides. "We can't print money on our copiers. The public eventually has to pay it."

The Forest Service says the fees are necessary to streamline the permitting process and eliminate a growing backlog of applications. The agency currently dips into its budget to cover processing costs, including expensive environmental studies, but appropriations have not kept pace with the demand for permits, officials say.

"The intent of the fees is to create the resources to be able to process these," says Ken Karkula, who manages the recreation side of the Forest Service's special-use program. "We have places in the United States where applications have been sitting on desks for several years."

Karkula also notes that other federal agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management have been collecting such fees for years.

There are 74,000 special-use permits granting companies and organizations access to national forest lands. Uses range from sewage treatment plants, hydroelectric power generating facilities and power lines to ski resorts, marinas and public parks.

Outfitters, who provide guided hunting, fishing, hiking and horseback trips into the backcountry, are one of the largest groups of permit-holders, with about 6,000, according to Karkula.

Special-use permits are good for anywhere from one day to up to 40 years for larger operations such as ski resorts. Most outfitters must renew their permits every five years, although some expire annually.

The agency receives about 6,000 applications each year for special-use authorizations.

The Forest Service proposal would create two separate fees - one for processing applications, the other for monitoring compliance once a permit is granted. The costs are based upon the amount of time it takes to perform each function.

Processing fees, for example, would range from $75 for an application that takes no more than eight hours to review to "full reasonable costs" for anything over 50 hours. Monitoring fees would start at $80 for eight to 24 hours of work to "reasonable costs" for anything over 50 hours. Activities requiring fewer than eight hours of monitoring would not be charged a monitoring fee.

The Forest Service is accepting comments about the proposed fees until Feb. 24. A final rule is expected to be issued in September, Karkula said.

In the past, larger businesses such as ski resorts and utilities have voluntarily paid the cost of reviewing permit applications to expedite the process. They say they don't mind the new fees, as long as the Forest Service expands its resources so their permits are issued in a timely manner.

"We have hundreds of permits that are expired, and the Forest Service has told us they don't have anybody to work on them," says Diane Ross-Leech of San Francisco-based Pacific Gas and Electric Co., which uses national forest land for distribution lines, communications facilities, weather stations and other operations. "We want some commitment that there will be service to justify the cost."

The cost, however, does worry smaller operations such as the Rich Ranch, which already forks over $20,000 annually in fees for access to federally managed lands, including $12,000 to the Forest Service.

The ranch, located in Montana's Cottonwood Creek Valley between the Lolo and Flathead national forests, offers all-inclusive packages ranging from $175 a day for hiking, fishing and riding expeditions to $450 a day for hunting trips.

Rich, 43, took over the business from his dad in 1982 and operates it with two of his four sisters and their sons and daughters. They gross about $450,000 annually, most of which is derived from the activities they offer on national forest land.

Rich insists the fee proposal is too vague, leaving outfitters unsure about which category they would fall into and, therefore, how much they would have to pay. He adds that environmental studies can take years to complete, racking up the amount of time it would take the Forest Service to review applications.

"They really have us between a rock and hard place," he says. "Without the Forest Service property, we wouldn't have a business. Our only choice is to pay and then pass the cost through to our clients, and hope they're willing to pay it."