QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY THE HONORABLE MALCOLM WALLOP

Oversight Hearing on Recreation Fees

Question: Please describe the fees currently collected on areas administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Answer: The attached table, "Recreation User Fee Program," lists the activities for which recreation fees are currently collected on refuges. Recreation user fees are currently collected on 18 national wildlife refuges and in FY 1984, $135,818 was collected and deposited in the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The fees collected are not based on a fixed-rate schedule, but are comparable with other public agencies and the private sector providing similar services in the area.

The Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 authorizes the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) to collect fees from the public for the use of specialized facilities, equipment, or services such as hunting blinds and regularly scheduled public tours. The Act prohibits the Service from collecting entrance fees.

Question: User fees collected by the Fish and Wildlife Service more than tripled between 1982 and 1984. How do you account for this sharp increase?

Answer: User fees collected in 1982 and 1984 were $107,421 and $135,818 respectively a 26.4% increase. The increase was primarily the result of adding a backpack/camping fee at Wichita Mountains Refuge.

Question: What is the policy of the Fish and Wildlife Service regarding fees for hunting and fishing?

Answer: The Service does not charge nor is it seeking to charge fees for hunting or fishing. In some cases there are fees for activities related to hunting (e.g., reservations for hunting blinds) but no fees are charged for the actual activities of hunting or fishing.

Question: Why should the duck stamp be used in lieu of an entrance fee? Proposed last Congress.

Answer: We are re-evaluating this issue in the process of determining the specific details for the implementation of the Administration's overall entrance fee policy. When this work is completed we will send to the Committee our proposal and accompanying rationale as it relates to this

1/ Estimated costs associated with operating the fee management unit. These include both direct (e.g., salaries and related expenses) and indirect (e.g., overhead and staff function expenses) costs.

N/A Not Applicable (there was no user fee program for the year).

In response to your letter of July 9, 1985, enclosed are

our

QUESTIONS BY SENATOR MALCOLM WALLOP

Question 1:

How can you meet the proposal contained in the President's 1986 Budget to increase recreation fees to recover 25% of the cost of Federal outdoor recreation programs?

Answer:

We cannot meet this proposal under existing law. Furthermore, we believe that, should legislation be enacted to permit us to increase fees to levels that would enable us to meet that proposal, the fee levels would be unrealistically high. We have recommended that this 25 percent goal not be applied to the fee program of the National Park Service.

Question 2: You said in your statement that you believe the American people would support the fee increases assumed by the President's Budget and the Senate Budget Resolution if they knew their contributions would be used to maintain park resources and to provide services to park users. What kind of fund might be established to and how would it be

ensure this result

administered?

-2

QUESTIONS BY SENATOR MALCOLM WALLOP--Cont.

Answer: We envision a two-tiered system wherein each park that collects fees (whether user fees or entrance fees) would establish its own receipts account, into which would be covered all fees collected. The collecting park would retain an amount sufficient to pay for the costs of collection and an additional amount to supplement its budget for needed maintenance, research, interpretation, and resources management. This supplemental

amount would be determined in advance in the regular budget and priority-setting process. A11 amounts remaining, if any, would be transferred to an account at headquarters. This headquarters account would be used to supplement the maintenance, research, interpretation, and resources management needs of other parks in the System, including those with little or no income from fees and those with special funding needs.

Question 3: Mr. Mott, you indicated in your remarks that additional revenues resulting from increased park entrance fees should be used to "increase our ability to maintain park facilities, buildings

interpretation."

and equipment and for research and

If these fees are raised, will we see a

corresponding decrease in future Administration budget requests

for these facilities and programs?