It might be helpful to look at how small a portion of user fees comprise the California Parks and Rec and Fish and Game budgets. Once the idea that they're based on a cash & carry consumer model is abandoned, it's easier to see where the budget dilemmas come from and why it will take an economic recovery--or powerful actions on the part of the legislature--to restore them.

The challenge, as I see it, is to prevent the permanent loss of resources during these lean times. We owe it to ourselves and more importantly, to those yet to come. This is our time to be stewards.

CA Parks and Rec budget

Projects a budget loss of nearly $200 million, or almost a third. Shows user fees (presumably entry and camping fees) of $80 million, or less than 10% of the current fiscal year budget and less than half of the proposed budget cuts (and projected to remain the same regardless of closures, which seems rather overly hopeful).

CA Fish and Game budget

Projects an $86 million budget reduction, about a 20% hit. Of FY '10-'11's $488 million budget, about $58 million came from licenses and tags--a little more than 10%. Poaching alone probably exceeds that value and we have roughly ten F&G officers for every million Californians.

As a final note, most state employees were on two, then three furlough days per month for about two years. With recent contracts, there's just one furlough/month for most.

p.s. Would be curious to see similar analyses for other states (this makes the above the next-to-final note, I guess).