Updating summer-use policies for US Forest Land

Some of the best places for snowboarding are located on land owned by the U.S. government and managed by the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). Rumors on Capitol Hill suggest that there may be some changes coming for how the USFS manage the land under its control.

According to a story picked up by CBS4 Denver, the lame-duck session of Congress might pass legislation updating the list of summertime activities allowed on USFS land.

The Ski Area Recreational Opportunity Act of 2009 is sponsored by one Democratic Senator (Sen. Mark Udall–Colorado) and two Republicans (Sen. John Barrasso and Sen. Mike Enzi, both of Wyoming).

Here’s how the story describes the legislation:

Activities that would be allowed under the bill include zip lines, mountain bike trails, parks, hiking trails, Frisbee golf courses and rope courses. Forbidden activities include tennis courts, swimming pools, golf courses, amusement parks, water slides and water parks.

The bill was proposed by the National Ski Area Association to provide consistency across Forest Service lands, said Jerry Blann, Jackson Hole Mountain Resort president. Blann sits on the association’s public lands committee

You can find information about the proposal at Thomas.Loc.Gov. Click here for the text of the bill, as reported in the Senate.

Here’s what the Congressional Budget Office has to say about the legislation:

S. 607 would clarify the authority of the Forest Service to allow ski concessioners to offer additional recreational services on public lands. Based on information provided by the agency, CBO estimates that enacting the legislation would have no significant effect on the federal budget. The Forest Service already has authority to allow its concessioners to provide off-season and other recreational services at ski resorts. Clarifying that authoritycould facilitate the agency’s collection of fees from ski concessioners (currently yielding offsetting receipts to the Treasury of about $30 million a year).

Because enacting the legislation could result in additional offsetting receipts (a credit against direct spending), pay-as-you-go procedures apply, but CBO estimates that any increase would total less than $500,000 a year.

The legislation contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.

On February 1, 2010, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 2476, the Ski Area Recreational Opportunity Enhancement Act of 2010, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on December 16, 2009. On July 8, 2010, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 2476 as ordered reported by the House Committee on Agriculture on June 30, 2010. S. 607 and the two versions of H.R. 2476 are similar, as is CBO’s estimate of their costs.

What do you think of this legislation? Should Congress set one national standard, or should those decisions be made by local managers? Is the fact that the ski area association proposed the legislation good or bad?