Dune Buggies at Bruneau Sand Dunes?

I claim ignorance - I have never recreated at sand dunes. But I wonder how many people really go out there for peace and quiet? Do people actually just walk around the dunes like they do in the forest? What is the nature like there? Do these offroaders cause damage like they do in the forest? On first read (without a lot of background), this doesn't seem so bad.

Brad, everyone already pays to access Idaho's State Parks via entrance fees, even non-motorized users. This is a terrible idea, but to suggest that non-motorized users should have to pay a fee that is commensurate with motorized users, whose impact is far greater and someone on foot or bike, is a mistake, in my opinion. I already think that the pay-to-play notion of adding fees to everything is unfair, undemocratic, and results in crazy ideas like this that force agencies to pander to the group that raises the most revenue.

I'm afraid your comments are all too true. I don't know how Parks and Recreation will ever be able to be self-supporting, but ideas like this will probably be popping up all over the state as the department attempts to find a way to survive.

Bruneau Dunes State Park is 4,800 acres, I can't find the acreage of the Oregon Dunes on the FS web site, but I believe it's MUCH larger than Bruneau Dunes and only about half of the area that comprises the Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area and all of the Sand Lake Recreation Area are open to motorized vehicles. I know that there are MANY problems at the Oregon Dunes that require funds and management. I think the state better look VERY closely at the costs associated with similar OHV use before opening the park to this use. Besides noise and environmental damage, they need to look at safety, law enforcement, facilities needed, etc. I suspect that the costs would FAR outweigh the income from OHV use.

New and increased fees on federal lands over the past decade or two have met with much opposition from the public--including environmental groups--and have not come close to covering costs or operating and maintaining visitor, interpretive, and recreational sites and facilities. Yet, user fees seem to be the only option in an environment where people just DON'T want to pay taxes to support these places. It's very frustrating, and I don't have any answers, but I think it's important to look at why these places have been held in public trust to begin with and attempt to find ways to protect them for generations to come.

We may have to be very creative...and, as you said, non-motorized recreationists will have to be ready to pay more. It's the same issue that fish & game agencies have faced for years in dealing with "consumptive" vs "non-consumptive" wildlife recreation.

These are all great comments. Matt, you make a good point about agencies being put in a position of catering to the user groups with more money. We're seeing that on federal lands where there is more money available through off-road vehicle registration fees to develop and maintain trails for motorized recreation than there is for hiking, biking and equestrian trails.

Jane, looking at the original intent behind why places like Bruneau Dunes were set aside in public trust is important. Earlier this year when the Governor proposed eliminating the Parks Department, the historians of state parks pointed out that some of the first state parks were established from private lands with the agreement between the land owners and the state that a parks department would be created to manage the state parks.

I suspect that Bruneau Dunes State Park was established to protect this natural feature, not to make it an off-road vehicle playground. Otherwise we would have seen this activity permitted already.

There is plenty of room on the back side of the dunes for buggys. The southwest side of the dunes rarely sees anyone on foot or horse back. We built buggys in the 60s and had organized events and everyone loved it. LETS GO AND HAVE SOME FUN.