Trail advocates press lawmakers for non‑motorized user fee; agencies note enforcement and revenue uncertainty

Michael, a trail advocate who testified to the committee, urged lawmakers to bring back a non‑motorized trail user fee to help unlock matching funds for professionally built trail systems and amenities. He said a prior model used a $10 in‑state and $20 out‑of‑state season fee and estimated conservative revenue in the low hundreds of thousands.

“What better way to put that money to use that users are putting forth and potentially as match or to help pay for new trail systems and trail amenities,” Michael said, urging the committee to continue work on the topic over the interim.

State Parks Director Dave Glenn clarified the department’s own projection was lower for a parks‑only approach — about $150,000 — and emphasized that enforcement would likely lean on an honor system and outreach rather than large enforcement deployments. “The challenge we’re gonna have is enforcement,” he said, adding that a public campaign and clear reinvestment messaging would be important.

Committee members discussed examples from other states, whether federal partners (forests, BLM) could assist through good‑neighbor agreements, and how to tie a user fee to the matching requirements of a recently approved trail budget amendment. One lawmaker suggested studying neighboring states that have used different funding mixes and operational approaches; another member recommended delaying full consideration until post‑session reporting updates are available.

Next steps: The committee indicated interest in keeping the topic on the interim list and in receiving state and interagency analysis of projected revenues, enforcement models and match requirements before deciding whether to pursue legislation.