Towns pay cash-strapped U.S. Forest Service for more help managing public lands that bring tourism

Ethan Patterson, 5, explores Hanging Lake in Glenwood Canyon, Colorado. (Associated Press photo by Chelsea Self)

More people than ever are visiting public lands to ski, hike, camp, and more, but federal funds to maintain those areas have decreased, partly because more than half of the U.S. Forest Service's budget has been used for fighting wildfires in recent years. Because of that, many small towns and rural areas have been obliged to pay Forest Service employees to maintain the land they depend on for tourism and recreation income, Sophie Quinton reports for Stateline.

Communities in Eagle County, Colorado, for example, which includes the ski resort town of Vail, are planning to pay as much as $120,000 next summer for Forest Service employees to monitor trails and campgrounds and enforce park rules, Quinton reports. Eagle County leaders have asked their congressional representatives for more funding, but some work can't wait for the slow process of federal appropriations.

Some in Vail worry that it sets a bad precedent. "Of course, because we have to, it’s how we pay the bills around here," Vail Town Councilman Greg Moffet told Quinton. "Once we take this on, it will never get fixed in Washington. We’ve solved the problem for them."

That could be bad news for small towns that aren't wealthy enough to pay for increased Forest Service help. And though increased visits bring more money to local businesses, fees for resorts on Forest Service land go to the federal government, not local governments. "U.S. Rep. Scott Tipton, a Republican representing Colorado’s Third District, has sponsored a bill under which forest regions would keep half the rental fees they collect from ski resorts on federal lands, but similar bills have stalled in recent years," Quinton reports.