Some Wildlife Lands And Boat Launches Face Closure Under State Budget Shortfall

[Marc Martyn]

WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov

LAND LINE NEWS NOTES

March 2011

Some wildlife lands and boat launches face closure under state budget shortfall

The statewide revenue shortfall is threatening a host of important state services, including state wildlife lands and water-access sites.

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Department of Natural Resources and State Parks and Recreation Commission are collaborating to support proposed legislation that would create a recreation land user fee to supplant lost state General Fund support and maintain public access to state recreation lands.

The proposed measures, Senate Bill 5622 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary ... &year=2011 ), introduced by Sen. Kevin Ranker, and House Bill 1796 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary ... &year=2011 ), introduced by Representative Kevin Van De Wege, are still under consideration in the Legislature.

The proposed bills would create an access pass-known as the Discover Pass-for use of all state recreation lands managed by WDFW, State Parks and DNR. The Discover Pass would cost $30 per year or $10 for a single day pass. Those purchasing certain fishing or hunting licenses could purchase a $7 annual pass for use solely on WDFW lands and water-access sites. Campers who pay for a State Parks campsite would not be required to purchase the Discover Pass and volunteers who provide 24 hours of service to any of the state agencies could receive a complimentary pass.

The Discover Pass is vitally needed to avert steep reductions in wildlife land operations and recreational access. It would provide an estimated $5.5 million for WDFW recreation lands in the coming biennium, an identical amount of support for DNR recreation lands, and $60 million for State Parks. The proposed Discover Pass revenue allocation reflects what is needed simply to maintain current operations.

The reduction proposed in the Governor's budget comes on the heels of other budget reductions. Since 2009, WDFW lands operation and maintenance has lost one fifth of its state funding. As General Fund support has declined, WDFW has been forced to turn to hunting and fishing license revenue to maintain recreational access. In essence, hunters and fishers are subsidizing other, non-paying users of WDFW lands.

The Discover Pass proposal is consistent with the Governor's suggestion that agencies adopt a user-pay model to maintain services that can no longer be supported through the state General Fund. The Discover Pass would allow all users-hikers, campers, equestrians, wildlife watchers, boaters and others-to share the cost of maintaining and operating state recreation lands.

Since the final outcome of the Discover Pass proposal is uncertain, lawmakers have asked WDFW what recreation land and boat launch service reductions would be necessary if the proposal is not successful.

In response, WDFW has developed criteria to guide the determination of permanent or seasonal closures on wildlife areas and water access sites that may become necessary if funding solutions are not found. Closure means that land management-such as toilet pumping, garbage removal and weed management-would not occur and that the areas would be closed to public access.

Final wildlife area and boat launch closure decisions would depend on the state budget that is adopted by the Legislature, and would be subject to a public process and consideration by the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission.

The criteria for assessing wildlife areas and water-access sites for potential closure follows the Governor's "user pays" direction, and is aimed at maximizing fishing and hunting use, since recreational licenses revenues currently provide the majority of WDFW's land operating funds.

The criteria to evaluate wildlife areas for possible closure are:

* Level of weed management required, based on current conditions and the presence of agriculture or ranching activity
* Percentage of critical wildlife habitat
* Cost of maintaining recreational access
* Amount of annual use for licensed activities such as fishing, hunting and trapping
* Amount of other types of recreation
* Access control (number of roads adjacent to or passing through the wildlife area)
* Annual maintenance cost per acre
* Restrictions associated with grant funding or contract obligations

The criteria to evaluate boat launches/water-access sites for potential closure are:

* Maintenance costs (grading, toilet pumping, ramp upkeep, vandalism clean up, enforcement)
* Amount of annual use for licensed activities such as fishing, hunting and trapping
* Amount of use for non-licensed recreation
* Presence of access-control points (gates)
* Availability of alternate, nearby public access sites
* Restrictions associated with grant funding or contract obligations

Contemplating possible closure of public recreation lands is a difficult and troubling prospect. We are working closely with our sister agencies and state leaders to try to avert such closures.

[fishaholictaz]

Moved to WY just in time... :bball:

[sickbayer]

it is what it is....as crap as that sounds.

[MarkFromSea]

Oh Man! This is not good! I have in the past wondered why WDFW spent a dime +++ on scenic trails off of Dodson Road, birding info and so much $$$$ on non hunting and non fishing activities..... This is not how I wanted to see this end up. When $ starts rolling back into WDFW, I hope they stay focused on their paying "customers." I hope a focused WDFW survives this recession.

[BARCHASER10]

You got that right. The birders, hikers, climbers, bikers and all the rest need to pay up.

[MarkFromSea]

I was thinking more along the line of WDFW not spending $$$$ on non hunters and non fishers, but whatever works. Since I'm not sure of how many dollars WDFW receives from non hunters/fishers, I'll keep that opinion on the down low.

There is millions brought in to the state general fund via taxes on fishing/hunting gear, fuel for hunt/fish trips, jobs that support outdoorsmen. The list is endless! I strongly doubt that Olympia turns over to WDFW the "total" funds that hunters and fishermen contribute to the state.

Also, seems to me the courts should collect more from those who are caught breaking game laws to assist funding law enforcement. The fines that make the news sound like a joke in comparison to the damage that the offenders have committed.

Just thinking out loud..........

[Stacie Kelsey]

We don't get money from enforcement busts though.

[wolverine]

Mark, the WDFW doesn't get the money from the tickets that the enforcement officers write. It goes to the county that the infraction occurred in.

[MarkFromSea]

Thanks.

How many think WDFW should get a cut of the fines collected? I'm raising my hand!




How often does a non WDFW officer make a fish or game related bust? I'm thinking at most, a dozen in the state for a year.

[Meeks9591]

We don't get money from enforcement busts though.

That's not right. At least a small portion should be circulating through.

Thanks,,,,, How many think WDFW should get a cut of the fines collected? I'm raising my hand!

Both my hands are raised.

[MarkFromSea]

We don't get money from enforcement busts though.

I wish you did!:scratch:

[Stacie Kelsey]

They don't get anything. That's per our Officers. And the guys put out lots of tickets every years. Some simple, some with warrants etc. They are super busy.

[Marc Martyn]

Wow, Stacie, I did not know that. You would think that being the case, the county law enforcements officers would take more of an interest in busting the poachers. I know at Medical Lake, the Medical Lake Police watch the lake quite closely. I called them one time and turned in a poacher and they responded right away. I guess it all boils down to man power, and how much is available.

[Stacie Kelsey]

That's exactly it. Man power and how much is available. They do a really great job for the limited man power they have.

[muskyhunter]

Hey Stacie,
Doesn't or wouldn't the Pittman-Robertson Act fall into play with this proposal? I know I spent a bunch of money on tackle this year so far and last year and the year before...and the year before..what happens to those tax dollars? Isn't that money supposed to fall into the hands of the WDFW too? That should offset some of the lost revenue ...no ? People are still buying weapons and gear no matter how bad the economy is..still gotta hunt and fish. Todd

[kevinb]

Its certainly a tough bind and puts the outdoorsman in a rough position.
WDFW has to deal with so many things other than enforcing game laws.
Case in point,just this last summer I responded to a fairly simple medical/aid call. Upon our arrival,I noticed
a WDFW Officer's rig already on scene and he was dealing with an individual. We (engine/medic unit) treated and released
our patient and the WDFW ended up having to arrest the fellow he was dealing with due to an outstanding warrant.
I was able to speak to him briefly(WDFW) and he stated that he would have to take him to Tacoma for booking and would be out of the area for several hours. Not trying to make this a rant but WDFW Officers are already spread so thin and now having to deal with such events as mentioned above. Just seems like they have a pretty full plate to deal with.
Anyhow,not trying to go off topic

[MarkFromSea]

[Stacie Kelsey]

Muskyhunter - I'm not sure about access to those funds. I know other agencies benefit from those funds. I'll have to check and see.

[Anglinarcher]

Here is my problem Marc and Stacie, I agree with both of you, in principle.

First, the primary reason that enforcement funds are not given to the organization doing the ticket writing is to prevent unfounded tickets from being written just to bolster the local budget. We all know that a $200 ticket cost less to pay then a day off work and the gas to and from court if you are given a bogus ticket in a different region or county. This keeps the enforcers honest. We all know the stories of parts of the US where small towns live and die on speed traps. I know of at least one enforcer that did this at Lake Lenore for years with "barbless hooks". I understood he never even showed up at court because he knew he would not win, but he counted on people paying the fine rather then paying to fight it.

Second, ever notice that when times get tough that the first things to be cut are the necessary or desired items. How much is the Governor cutting from her pet projects?

I don't desire to point fingers at anyone or any group specifically, but the game is always the same. When times get tough, we are told we need to pay more or we will loose fire or police or in this case land access. Makes you think that perhaps with the loss of funds we can just go on the land and see if there are any enforcers left to catch us. OK, just venting. I don't see a lot of the Governors LIBERAL programs being cut.

If the bill passes, will you and I pay for it, most likely. Personally I don't know how to live without my outdoors. But one thing is for sure, if Satan and the Governor were both running for the same office, I would not vote because I would know that voting for one was the same as voting for the other.