We offer below brief excerpts from the approximately 250 pages of academic articles in the two journals. As you will see, contrary to Forest Service propaganda, scientific research shows that Fee Demo is by no means popular with the American public. We begin with a summary of the research implications of both issues, as summarized by guest editor Alan Watson. The excerpts from the two journals, themselves, follow on their own pages with links at the bottom of this page. There has been a pervasive impulse to depend upon a strictly economic paradigm to answer public lands fee and pricing questions though there are huge social science issues of equity, public trust , government subsidies for public goods, and fair pricing that extend beyond traditional economic models.
Stewardship implies personal acceptance of responsibility.
We think this kind of information reopens the public debate over whether the American people 'generally support' the use of fees for public recreation access. While the very low income are currently underrepresented on public lands, a policy which further reduces their access seems irresponsible. By proceeding with implementation of access fee policies without the ability to anticipate how various public segments will respond or the ability to actually monitor effects illustrates a lack of concern for the intended function of public lands in the lives of the American people. Click here to read excerpts from the Journal of Park and Recreation Administration or from the Journal of Leisure Research. Please pass this information on to others you know who would be interested in research on fees.