
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
<title>Potential for losing all permits from USFS</title>
<link>https://www.nationalforesthomeowners.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1811451</link>
<description></description>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 09:47:53 GMT</lastBuildDate>
<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2025 16:28:44 GMT</pubDate>
<copyright>Copyright &#xA9; 2025 National Forest Homeowners</copyright>
<atom:link href="https://www.nationalforesthomeowners.org/forums/topic_rss.asp?id=1811451" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link>
<item>
<title>Potential for losing all permits from USFS</title>
<link>https://www.nationalforesthomeowners.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1811451</link>
<guid>https://www.nationalforesthomeowners.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1811451</guid>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Has there been any discussion about the potential for the new administration to simply require the USFS to abandon the program of leasing cabins on the basis of cost savings?  If that happened, would we cabin owners be able to argue for an opportunity
    to purchase our lots?  Would most people want to purchase?  If a purchase were allowed, would the appraisal be done on a whole tract basis similar to a Land Exchange?  </p>
<p>If drastic cuts to the USFS personnel actually take place, who will manage our permits?  </p>
<p>How worried should we be about the future of our cabins?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Submitted by member:  Gary Wollschlager. gwollschlager@gmail.com</p>
<p> </p>]]></description>
<pubDate>Sat, 8 Mar 2025 18:40:29 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>My Opinion</title>
<link>https://www.nationalforesthomeowners.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1811458</link>
<guid>https://www.nationalforesthomeowners.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1811458</guid>
<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000;">Gary,</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000;">The questions you raise are top of mind with NFH leadership. I think it's safe to say we find ourselves in an environment of uncertainty under the new administration where anything is possible.&nbsp; I'll offer my personal opinion with the following comments.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000;">First, I believe it's unlikely the Forest Service (FS) would shut down the cabin program due to budget concerns. We have a couple of things going for us.&nbsp;The Recreation Residence Program (RRP) generates annual fee revenues that are significantly higher than the cost to run the program. Our program generates over $5,000/acre of annual fee revenue which is much higher than other special use recreation programs. In addition, beginning this year the FS now directly retains the RRP fee revenue to support the RRP program and other recreation programs. Simply said, the RRP is a money maker for the FS.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000;">We do anticipate further reductions of FS Staff which could make administering the RRP more challenging but we assume the FS would be required to maintain the program in its current form and find a way to administer the program with fewer staff.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000;">Regarding potential changes of FS land ownership, we are aware some state and congressional representatives, primarily in western states favor the transfer of federal lands into state or private ownership. It's difficult to say if there is enough political momentum for for this to be a serious threat to our program. Under current laws, the methods for transferring federal lands into private ownership are 1) land exchanges, 2) outright purchases via congressional action, or 3) outright purchases of "small tract" parcels under limited circumstances. Under all three options, the purchase or exchange price is based on an appraisal of fair market value for a cabin tract land parcel and requires all permit holders (lots) in a cabin tract to participate in a single transaction. There are a small number of cabin tracts who are pursuing or have expressed an interest in pursuing a land exchange, but we believe most cabin owners prefer to retain the program in it's current form paying annual permit fees for the use of the land.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000;">NFH leadership, along with NFH's Government Affairs representatives (lobbyists) are monitoring the situation closely.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000;">Doug Gann, NFH Past President</span></p>]]></description>
<pubDate>Sat, 8 Mar 2025 20:14:31 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://www.nationalforesthomeowners.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1811465</link>
<guid>https://www.nationalforesthomeowners.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1811465</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Thanks Doug for your prompt response.  I am sure the NFH will be on top of this situation and will keep all of us updated.  We appreciate our membership.]]></description>
<pubDate>Sat, 8 Mar 2025 21:18:19 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://www.nationalforesthomeowners.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1812856</link>
<guid>https://www.nationalforesthomeowners.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1812856</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Yes, thank you Doug and NFH, we too appreciate our membership as well as your knowledge and efforts on our behalf. Your reply mentioned a few tracts that are pursuing or expressed interest in pursuing a land exchange - is there any information that can be passed along on how these plans are moving forward, and issue, success and roadblocks along the way? If the Cabin program looks to be dropped or changed in untenable ways a road map and information on already in motion or completed exchanges or purchases would be helpful. Thanks again.]]></description>
<pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2025 17:28:44 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
