1 To be posted as a charge area at such time as facilities under construction have been completed.

A Federal recreation area entrance permit is required for use of this area under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965. Your permit has not been

displayed (on driver's side dashboard or sun visor clearly visible from the outside) according to posted instructions.

1. If you have a valid Federal recreation area entrance permit for this area, please display properly. Record its serial number here

notice in the attached envelope and mail.

place this

2. If you have not had an opportunity to purchase a permit, the attached envelope is provided for your convenience. At end of day remove from car, place this notice and $1 in cash, check or money order in this envelope, and mail.

If notice and remittance or evidence of permit is not received within 10 days, a complaint will be filed with the United States Commissioner and a warrant may be issued for your arrest.

Ranger.

The entrance fees charged at corps projects in 1966 and 1967 are the minimum on the schedule promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior. The entrance fees for 1967 are 50 cents for 1-day use by an individual, at one project; $1 per day for 1-day use by the occupants of a single vehicle at one project only; $3 good for a single vehicle for 6 months at one project only, and $7 for a single vehicle for a permit good all year at any Federal recreation area.

The Corps of Engineers administers 235 reservoir projects of all types, and several navigation projects along the Nation's rivers at which there are approximately 3,000 points where the shores may be reached, not including lands leased to others. Many of these access points are small and have little or no Federal improvements but are nevertheless used by fishermen and others desiring access to the waters of the reservoir. About one-third of them have been provided with at least some of the minimum facilities mentioned previously.

For the current recreation year, April 1, 1967, to March 31, 1968, 168 public use areas at 65 projects have been designated by the Secretary of the Army for collection of entrance fees. These areas typically contain an access road with minor circulation roads, parking areas, boat launching ramps, potable water, toilets, and camping and picnicking facilities. I will show the location of the projects, typical site locations of individual fee areas, and arrangements of roads in a recreational site together with facilities provided with the use of several slides:

Slide No. 3: This map of the United States shows the location of the 65 projects which have designated public use fee areas.

Slide No. 4: Canyon Reservoir on the Guadalupe River in Texas is located about halfway between San Antonio and Austin. There are 7 recreation areas at Canyon Reservoir which are shown in red. The three areas circled in black are designated as fee areas.

Slides No. 5, 6, 7: The next three slides show maps of typical public access areas with multiple road entrances. Public roads, shown in red, provide access to these areas. Entrance is gained from these roads at separate points as shown by the red arrows. The interior circulation roads are shown in black.

Slide No. 8: A typical parking area at a public access point. Space for boat trailers is provided.

Slide No. 9: This is a concrete-surfaced boat launching ramp. Slide No. 10: A family group at one of our picnic tables. Parking is nearby.

Slide No. 11: Another family enjoying camping at one of our individual campsites. Facilities provided include a picnic table, tent pad, fireplace, trash receptacle and a parking space for the family car.

Slide No. 12: Toilet facilities are provided at all of our fee areas. This is a typical waterborne toilet. We have other types at our projects also.

Slide No. 13: A typical small concession lease site at a public access

area.

Slide No. 14: A public beach and bathhouse.

During 1966, the Corps of Engineers collected $105,000 in entrance fees which was deposited in the land and water conservation fund. However, we did not keep cost of collection figures except at a few areas where special studies were conducted. Collections were accomplished by regular operating personnel in addition to other normally assigned duties. The collections for the period April 1, 1967, to August 31, 1967 have approximated $600,000. This does not include admissions granted by Golden Eagle passport, the sale of which may have been made by others and the proceeds not credited to the corps. We have administered the program in 1967 largely through roving rangers who check the areas periodically. Our gross costs for the same period were roughly equal to the amount collected. These costs are comprised of the actual salary and operating expenses of extra rangers hired primarily to police the collection of fees. The cost of these rangers, because of their presence and because they perform other incidental duties, should be allocated only in part against fee collection. Consequently, we feel our collections are exceeding costs. However, the current method of collection is not capable of precise analysis.

There have been a number of problems in collecting fees, a situation which may be more apparent when I tell you that our reservoir projects have a total shoreline of over 30,000 miles.

Slide No. 15: This slide shows a map of the Whitney Reservoir project located about 30 miles northwest of Waco, Tex. There are 19 public-use areas shown in red, of which eight, shown with names outlined in black, are designated as fee areas.

Attendance in 1966 at these eight fee areas totaled 811,000. To man entrance booths at the Whitney Point project would require 26 employees; by using the roving ranger system, we try to cover these areas during peak use periods with four men. With the project office located 20 miles from the most remote area, and an average distance of 6 miles between areas, the administrative problems are evident. It is not practicable to assure payment by all visitors because complete coverage by rangers at all times cannot be economically justified. Persons who do not pay when contacted by a ranger, or who do not have in their possession a satisfactory permit, are issued a notice of violation. If, after 20 days, they have not furnished the number of their permit or made the necessary payment, the violation is turned over to the U.S. attorney for prosecution. Approximately 30,000 notices of violation were issued up to September 30, 1967. Sufficient time has not elapsed to determine the effectiveness of the followup action by the U.S. attorneys. We have found that many of them are not able to schedule these actions in already busy calendars. Working through the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, we intend to take steps to improve these enforcement procedures with the Department of Justice.

The Land and Water Conservation Fund Act provides for entrance, admission, and user fees. At corps projects, the only fee now imposed is the entrance fee. Admission fees have been interpreted to mean fees

imposed to view performances or exhibits which are not pertinent to corps projects. User fees have thus far been interpreted by the Army Engineers to be applicable to personal services or supplies and utili ties which are provided at corps projects only by concessionaires or lessees who are permitted to charge therefor within the limits specified by the regulations of the Secretary of the Interior.

There have been objections raised to the imposition of entrance fees. Most of the complaints have been that the fee constitutes a tax, a dual charge for facilities provided at taxpayer expense, a discrimination against the poor, a violation of the traditional concept of free use of Federal waters, or a charge for the bounties of nature. Complaints have also been raised by nonprofit organizations who have regularly used or wish to use a fee area for a group assembly of civic value, such as church groups and Rotary Clubs. It should also be noted that there has been comment in favor of the charge as providing a "desirable" measure of exclusiveness, in reducing vandalism, and in improved management.

If the entrance fee provisions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act are rescinded, as proposed in H.R. 11236, it would place the Corps of Engineers in a position where it would be the only Federal agency excepted from the provisions of the act; it will have the effect of discouraging participation by States and other public agencies which usually rely on fees to meet part of their expenses and which would suffer competitively with free Federal areas; it would decrease income to the land and water conservation fund with resultant diminution of the desirable objectives of that fund; and it would be at variance with the congressionally accepted concept that services rendered to special beneficiaries should be self-sustaining to the fullest extent possible.

The Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (Public Law 88-578) provides for an integrated, coordinated program which involves every Federal agency with any significant responsibilities in the field of recreation. Its general purpose the improvement of outdoor recreational possibilities for all Americans-is beyond criticism. That purpose can only be realized through careful planning and through the expenditure of money; the Congress provided for both when it passed the act.

We seek to implement the fee provisions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act fairly and equitably under the general guidance of the Secretary of the Interior, recognizing that there may be some imperfections in our methods and recognizing further that there are practical, but as yet not clearly definable limits in the application of the fee concepts to corps projects. As we gain experience under the act, the definition of limits will become apparent and we feel that the problems associated with implementation will be reduced. We are unaware of any policy considerations affecting the imposition of fees at Corps of Engineers reservoir projects which were not present when the Congress enacted the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act. Consequently, we oppose enactment of any legislation which excepts the Army from the application of a national policy and program.

I will now turn to the second part of H.R. 11236, which proposes to prohibit the imposition of charges for a private boat mooring or docking facility, duck blind, ski jump, swimming platform or raft, or any other similar floating facility at corps projects.