251 



Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands Page 4 



July 25, 1995 



concession license authority is administratively intimidating to the extent that we 

 believe concession managers, merely for the sake of convenience and lack of man- 

 power, may very well choose to limit the number of small operations currently 

 authorized by commercial use licenses. Our experience tells us that both of these 

 scenarios are very real and are thus very troubling. 



Need for reform 



Beyond the clear need to provide a fair return to the goverment for operating on 

 public lands, there are other, practical, reasons to support concession reform. The 

 pursuit of responsible recreational and educational activities on federal land is 

 confounded by permits that have no statutory authority, environmental analyses 

 arbitrarily applied, and permit managers who do not understand that partnership is a 

 two-way street, among other problems. Access to federal land by educational and 

 commercial operations must be predicated by the desire of all parties to provide quality 

 services that enliven, educate and serve the public, while providing a fair return to the 

 government for the privilege of operating on federal land. But this ideal relationship has 

 been a fleeting goal. 



Knowing that you have a commitment to conservation and public service is not 

 enough to know that you will always be treated with the same level of commitment and 

 professionalism by land managers. While most land managers understand the benefits 

 of partnerships and private enterprise, we run into too many that seek to place obstacles 

 before legitimate programs that provide quality services. Knowing that you do an 

 excellent job is not enough to know that you have a reasonable chance of renewing your 

 permit. For these reasons, among others, concession reform is a proper public policy 

 endeavor. 



