Los Padres is the least successful of the four Southern California National Forests as regards the experimental "Adventure Pass" program! Despite promises that the program would generate a wealth of revenues, income from sales for July through September 1997 was only $66,300, 70% less than the projected income of $223,250.
20% off the top went elsewhere within the Forest Service, leaving $53,000 available for use on the Forest.
But the biggest chunk disappeared for salaries and vehicle expenses - a whopping $42,000. Another $3,000 for sale credits, leaving - wait for it - a grand total of $7,950 for site-specific Forest Service projects. For the entire five Ranger Districts within Los Padres! For the busiest summer months. Hmmm...Sounds like a dynamite program, doesn't it?
Note that the Forest Service needed to bring in $66,300 to be able to put $7,950 into tangible, physical improvements. That's only $1,600 for each of the five Ranger Districts within Los Padres National Forest! Los Padres could scrap the "Adventure Pass" tomorrow and do better by having a few garage sales or by hitting up local Rotary Clubs!
Write your representatives today, to demand the cancellation of the "Adventure Pass"/ Fee Demonstration Pilot Program! As a job creation program it may be a winner, but in terms of maintaining the facilities in Los Padres Forest, it's an abysmal, pathetic almost total failure.
Up till the end of September, 1997, $693,850 was raised from sales of the "Adventure Pass", throughout Southern California. Deduct the mandatory, US Forest Service 20% off the top, and we're left with $555,100. Subtract $117,500 for cash already allocated (i.e. prepaid) in August. Then kiss goodbye to $151,150 for one quarter's Forest Protection Officer costs. Pay for the printing of the highway signs - $23,000 for this quarter alone - and put $24,000 into what they call refund/reserve. Leaving only $239,425 available for allocation for site-specific projects between October and December 1997, for all the four Forests - the Angeles, Cleveland, Los Padres and San Bernardino. By the way, these four Forests brought in only two thirds of the sales anticipated by Forest Service projections!
You may remember the US Forest Service "Adventure Pass" brochure stating that "your money will go directly back to providing the things you've said mean the most to you, such as more and cleaner restrooms, better trails, higher quality natural environment and more frequent trash removal."
Or from the same brochure - "at least 80% of the funds collected will be returned to the local Forest, to be invested in maintaining and improving recreation sites and facilities, and in protecting the Forest resource and habitat."
Now, let's see. $239,425 is available for allocation in the entire, four "Adventure Pass" Forests, for tangible, physical, site-specific improvements, for a three-month period after the big summer season, out of the total revenue from "Adventure Pass" sales of $693,850. That's a real world total of 34.5%. Hardly 80%. The brochure should be rewritten to state that "34.5% of your money will go to the restrooms, trails, trash, etc." So much for "your money will go directly back to" the amenities above.
For Los Padres, with its three month summer income from "Adventure Pass" sales of $66,300, the $7,950 available for site-specific projects is only 12% of revenues raised.
What will the next quarter's figures be? When the summer's over, Forest use drops dramatically. But the Forest Service cut of 20% and the staff salaries must still be paid. We forecast some serious losses over the winter, from the "Adventure Pass" fiasco!
Oh, and the bit about "80% of the funds collected will be returned to the local Forest to be invested in...protecting the Forest resource and habitat." That word "protecting" must be in reference to "Adventure Pass" enforcement by Forest Protection Officers. Just in case you were thinking that it might have meant protecting the vegetation or the rivers or the wildlife.
The US Forest Service's nationwide press release of 6.26.97 states that the program "allows 80% of the new fees collected between 1996 and 1998 to go into the recreation maintenance budget of the National Forest where collected." It's interesting to note that these Forest Protection Officer salaries and vehicle expenses clearly fall under the Forest recreation maintenance budget! Or maybe it all hinges on the word "allows" in the quotation above from the press release. As in, 80% is allowed to go to recreation maintenance budgets - but since it's not required to go directly there, it can be siphoned off to Forest Protection Officer salaries and vehicle costs.
You can get lost in the words. But the fact is, the "Adventure Pass" program is a flop. It doesn't put 80% of the funds into the physical facilities, as the Forest Service assured us it would. From "Adventure Pass" sales at independent businesses (as opposed to those from Forest Service offices), a 10-20% cut goes to the vendor. That is, $1 out of each $5 daily Pass sold and $3 from every $30 annual Pass. All of the financial calculations above are based upon revenues from which the vendor's cut has already been subtracted. Which makes the amount of money available for Forest facilities an even smaller percentage of what we've had to shell out for our Passes!
Since 22% of total nationwide Forest Recreation use occurs in California, and most of that probably in Southern California, indications are not exactly rosy for expanding the "Adventure Pass" program to Forests in other parts of the country, which are all further from a major urban population base like Southern California.
"Adventure Pass" expenses (as opposed to revenues generated) ran up to $1,241,075, from March through September 1997. Training contracts came to $439,300. Staffing costs for Forest Protection Officers totalled $495,500. Road signs cost about $68,000, but that's a one time cost. Another $193,000 went to other full-time "Adventure Pass" program staff besides the Forest Protection Officers. The "Adventure Pass" pays staff salaries far more than it pays to clear trails or to repair and paint bathrooms. Again, these staff costs don't jump up in three busy summer months - they stay the same all year. The whole program is so topheavy it's completely useless as a serious means of generating funds to maintain Forest recreation facilities.