Recreation.gov and junk fees

[thegib]

Hi all,

I think everyone would benefit from reading this brief essay by Matt Stoller about Recreation.gov and its proprietor Booz Allen. The essay includes a bit of American economic history that, I think, is pleasantly non-partisan. Also note-worthy is his suggestion for targeted action towards the end of the essay. Cheers!

https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/why- ... paign=post

[dave54]

Interesting...

My Wave permit last year was free in person.
The few times I use Recreation.gov I do notice the extra fee charge. It is not onerous, but is annoying. IMHO there should be no extra fees and instead the government pay the vendor a flat annual payment to run the site.

I boondock a lot so there is no charge, although some pundits are calling for boondocking to be more regulated and restricted.

[Jim F]

thegib,

Thanks for this article. Perhaps the operation of rec.gov is just the "tip of the iceberg." See the Oct 6, 2016 New York Times article "At Booz Allen, a Vast U.S. Spy Operation, Run for Private Profit."

Jim

[balzaccom]

The system is not ideal, that's for sure. Should the US govt create its own software company to manage all this? I'm not so certain. Many large corporations outsource this kind of activity, both to limit capital expenses and to access tech expertise. And they get to limit payroll expenses at the same time.

Would a US govt run system work better or cheaper?

Meanwhile, none of this is going away, as we continue to see increase enthusiasm and traffic in our national parks and recreational areas. I'd love to hear what the perfect solution is, but so far, I haven't seen it.