Bill 4 Discounted Discover Pass for Fish & Hunt Licenses 3/11 Significant Update

[bigtex]

Senate Bill 5289 sponsored by Senators Hargrove, Hatfield, Ranker, Hobbs, Sheldon, and Schoesler was introduced today. It allows you to purchase a Discover Pass at the price of $20 (normally $30) while you are purchasing one of the following:

- Big game hunting license
- Small game hunting license
- Western Washington pheasant permit
- Trapping license
- Watchable wildlife decal
- Combination, saltwater, or freshwater personal use fishing license

http://dlr.leg.wa.gov/billsummary/default.aspx?Bill=5289&year=2013

[Elkrunner]

I say its still a rip off...

[KimberRich]

 

[Heredoggydoggy]

Support the Bill anyway--Jay Inslee needs the money! 

[bigtex]

One step in the right direction?

[huntnphool]

This legistlation shows you that they realize hunters and fisherman are getting screwed. They know we are already over paying for all these licenses, passes and fees but they are too addicted to revenue spending to include the pass for free to those purchasing hunting/fishing licenses.

This is a slap in the face IMO.

[pianoman9701]

I like the other bill. We already pay enough of the state's public lands bills with our hunting and fishing licenses. Let the wolf lovers buy the Discover Pass. I don't use state parks for anything. I'd also like to see some enforcement out there writing tickets on these people parked at Silver Star and Tarbell without passes. Never happens. Always several cars, never anything hanging in the window.

[huntnphool]

One step in the right direction?

LOL Kind of like the fuel prices right?, jack the prices up for 4 years from $1.89/gal to $4.00/gal+, then when the price is dropped to $3/gal everyone will happy.

Lets tell the public that we want 15 breeding packs of wolves, that way 10 bredding pairs won't seem so bad.

[Bob33]

One step in the right direction?

Yes. The right direction is to lower prices. I suspect many feel that $20 is still too high for those who are already spending hundreds for hunting related licenses, fees, tags, and other costs.

[bearpaw]

I say its still a rip off...

 

[Oldguy]

I can foresee the Discover Pass replacing the WDFW pass for access to boat launches and hunting sites. The signs already are in place except for painting out the small "WDFW permit exception." Hence the discounted price to lead into the new rules. Politicians are a sneaky bunch!

[HUNTINCOUPLE]

I say its still a rip off...

 

[Wea300mag]

I agree its a step in the right direction but not sure its enough to get me to buy a pass. I'm going to have to think this through. There are still plenty of places to hunt where you don't need it.

[gaddy]

still a nope from me

[Widgeondeke]

I am yet to buy one.  While a gesture in the correct direction. I think they nedd to go a lil lower.  $10 is what I feel a hunter or fisherperson should pay. While those not buying one of the noted licenses should pay $40.   

[Curly]

I like the other bill. We already pay enough of the state's public lands bills with our hunting and fishing licenses.

 

[washelkhunter]

     !  Here ya go stupe, you get a discount for lettin us screw ya. Gosh thx! 

Once again: Privatize the operation of the state parks!

[bobcat]

The issue in my mind is this: the Discover Pass should be for developed sites on DNR lands (campgrounds, parking lots, trailheads, etc).  NOT undeveloped timber lands such as where we hunters spend our time. So requiring it only at those specific locations, where extra maintenance is required by state employees, would solve the problem. But they've got all the signs up and the rules in place, so that's probably not going to happen. So, the other bill is the best option, as Pianoman said.

[Special T]

The amount is NOT the issue so this is NOT a step in the right direction. the issue is that the state parks cannot make hard choices OR raise funds  to support  themselves. I despise the DP  BECAUSE they are trying to make sportsmen pay for something the mostly don't use. Requiring the pass for unimproved areas is just a slap in the face, so the other bill is better. I would bet my wallet that this bill is in response to the other bill which will not RAISE Rev for Wa Parks.  Do not be fooled, This is bill is still robbing peter to pay paul. It is not fair on its face, and throwing out a token "Discount" just shows how desperate they are to take your $. I have already written my representatives, and will ask them NOT to supoort this one...
This "discount" would likely go away as soon as they think they could get away with it. I will stand on my princaple and say NO to the DP even if it was $5.. 

[bigtex]

3/11 Update

Significant changes to this bill.

Under the amended bill you would no longer need a Discover Pass "When operating on an agency managed road, including a forest or land management road, that is not blocked by a gate. However, a discover pass or day-use permit is required for operation of any motor vehicle in a state park beyond a staffed entrance booth or otherwise at the entrance to a state park where staff is present for purposes of discover pass or day-use permit compliance." Essentially in these areas the Discover Pass is a parking pass, not an operating pass as it currently is

Under the original bill there was a proposed discounted fee for Discover Pass purchasers who hold hunting and fishing licenses. That wording has been removed and is replaced by: "(1) By mutual agreement, the agencies may sell discounted discover passes at a rate below that established under RCW 79A.80.020 or discounted day-use permits at a rate below that established under RCW 79A.80.030 for purposes of bulk sales to retailers, agency license and permit product bundling, and partnership opportunities to expand accessibility and visibility of the discover pass and recreational opportunities on agency-managed lands. (2) In exercising this authority, the agencies must prioritize opportunities for discounted sales that result in a net revenue gain." Essentially meaning WDFW, DNR, and Parks can get together and negotiate a reduced/bundled fee

The amended bill UNANIMOUSLY passed the Senate on 3/8

[lokidog]

So, does the first paragraph mean you can park along a road that is ungated, but if you park in front of a gate and walk around it, you would need the pass?  How would you park on a gated road if you didn't go through the, theoretically, closed gate?

[bigtex]

So, does the first paragraph mean you can park along a road that is ungated, but if you park in front of a gate and walk around it, you would need the pass?  How would you park on a gated road if you didn't go through the, theoretically, closed gate?

What it means is if you are driving on a DNR road you do not need the pass, as soon as you park you do. If you park in front of a gate, you need the pass. All it does is basically just loosen the requirements for having it when you are driving.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

So, does the first paragraph mean you can park along a road that is ungated, but if you park in front of a gate and walk around it, you would need the pass?  How would you park on a gated road if you didn't go through the, theoretically, closed gate?

What it means is if you are driving on a DNR road you do not need the pass, as soon as you park you do. If you park in front of a gate, you need the pass. All it does is basically just loosen the requirements for having it when you are driving.

I believe you are mistaken.

" However, a discover pass or day-use permit is required for operation of any motor vehicle in a state park beyond a staffed entrance booth or otherwise at the entrance to a state park where staff is present for purposes of discover pass or day-use permit compliance." Essentially in these areas the Discover Pass is a parking pass, not an operating pass as it currently is"

I read it as it's a parking permit in these developed areas, not in the undeveloped areas.

[bigtex]

So, does the first paragraph mean you can park along a road that is ungated, but if you park in front of a gate and walk around it, you would need the pass?  How would you park on a gated road if you didn't go through the, theoretically, closed gate?

What it means is if you are driving on a DNR road you do not need the pass, as soon as you park you do. If you park in front of a gate, you need the pass. All it does is basically just loosen the requirements for having it when you are driving.

I believe you are mistaken.

" However, a discover pass or day-use permit is required for operation of any motor vehicle in a state park beyond a staffed entrance booth or otherwise at the entrance to a state park where staff is present for purposes of discover pass or day-use permit compliance." Essentially in these areas the Discover Pass is a parking pass, not an operating pass as it currently is"

I read it as it's a parking permit in these developed areas, not in the undeveloped areas.

The part you highlighted is just for State Parks, not WDFW or DNR areas. You also need to read the entire bill, effective in 2012 the pass was needed at all areas, not just developed. This bill does nothing to change that. All it does is say you don't need it if you are operating a vehicle on DNR/WDFW lands that aren't gated.

[lokidog]

So, does the first paragraph mean you can park along a road that is ungated, but if you park in front of a gate and walk around it, you would need the pass?  How would you park on a gated road if you didn't go through the, theoretically, closed gate?

What it means is if you are driving on a DNR road you do not need the pass, as soon as you park you do. If you park in front of a gate, you need the pass. All it does is basically just loosen the requirements for having it when you are driving.

I believe you are mistaken.

" However, a discover pass or day-use permit is required for operation of any motor vehicle in a state park beyond a staffed entrance booth or otherwise at the entrance to a state park where staff is present for purposes of discover pass or day-use permit compliance." Essentially in these areas the Discover Pass is a parking pass, not an operating pass as it currently is"

I read it as it's a parking permit in these developed areas, not in the undeveloped areas.

The part you highlighted is just for State Parks, not WDFW or DNR areas. You also need to read the entire bill, effective in 2012 the pass was needed at all areas, not just developed. This bill does nothing to change that. All it does is say you don't need it if you are operating a vehicle on DNR/WDFW lands that aren't gated.

So hey, you can take the shortcut through Cap Forest, but don't stop to take a leak....  This DP is still a bunch of crapola for those of us already spending hundreds of dollars for the privelage of trying to feed our families.   

[bigtex]

So, does the first paragraph mean you can park along a road that is ungated, but if you park in front of a gate and walk around it, you would need the pass?  How would you park on a gated road if you didn't go through the, theoretically, closed gate?

What it means is if you are driving on a DNR road you do not need the pass, as soon as you park you do. If you park in front of a gate, you need the pass. All it does is basically just loosen the requirements for having it when you are driving.

I believe you are mistaken.

" However, a discover pass or day-use permit is required for operation of any motor vehicle in a state park beyond a staffed entrance booth or otherwise at the entrance to a state park where staff is present for purposes of discover pass or day-use permit compliance." Essentially in these areas the Discover Pass is a parking pass, not an operating pass as it currently is"

I read it as it's a parking permit in these developed areas, not in the undeveloped areas.

The part you highlighted is just for State Parks, not WDFW or DNR areas. You also need to read the entire bill, effective in 2012 the pass was needed at all areas, not just developed. This bill does nothing to change that. All it does is say you don't need it if you are operating a vehicle on DNR/WDFW lands that aren't gated.

So hey, you can take the shortcut through Cap Forest, but don't stop to take a leak....

That is what the bill says. Like i said, unanimous support.

[lokidog]

Guess I'll just pee out the window while I'm driving and hope that some of our politicians are standing in the way... that's all they deserve from us.   

[Sitka_Blacktail]

"3)(a) An agency may waive the requirements of this section 32 for any person who has secured the ability to access specific recreational land through the provision of monetary consideration to the agency or for any person attending an event or
function that required the provision of monetary compensation to the agency."

I'd say a person who paid for a hunting license and tag has provided a monetary consideration to attend an event, ie hunting season.  And to charge a citizen to access unimproved land of which he is an owner as a citizen is immoral at the least and should be illegal.

There's a reason it's called "public land".

[bigtex]

"3)(a) An agency may waive the requirements of this section 32 for any person who has secured the ability to access specific recreational land through the provision of monetary consideration to the agency or for any person attending an event or
function that required the provision of monetary compensation to the agency."

I'd say a person who paid for a hunting license and tag has provided a monetary consideration to attend an event, ie hunting season.  And to charge a citizen to access unimproved land of which he is an owner as a citizen is immoral at the least and should be illegal.

There's a reason it's called "public land".

You buy your license to hunt, not for access.

[lokidog]

Just like in this state, you pay for your car tabs to park it on the street, you have to pay all the tolls and gas taxes to actually use it.    

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Wait til they start charging all the clam diggers $30 to park on the beach. This is the same thing.

[Special T]

They should require it! its state land... Either parks, DNR or....

[bigtex]

Wait til they start charging all the clam diggers $30 to park on the beach. This is the same thing.

The only reason they don't is because while the coastal beaches are owned by State Parks, it is not considered a State Park, but rather the Seashore Conservation Area. The Discover Pass bill requires the pass in State Parks, not State Park lands.

Had the legislation required the Discover Pass on State Park LANDS (similar to WDFW and DNR lands) the Pass would be required.

[bigtex]

They should require it! its state land... Either parks, DNR or....

I agree. The coast is probably the most heavily used state land in the state...and it's the only area not required to have the pass. 

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Wait til they start charging all the clam diggers $30 to park on the beach. This is the same thing.

The only reason they don't is because while the coastal beaches are owned by State Parks, it is not considered a State Park, but rather the Seashore Conservation Area. The Discover Pass bill requires the pass in State Parks, not State Park lands.

Had the legislation required the Discover Pass on State Park LANDS (similar to WDFW and DNR lands) the Pass would be required.

As far as I'm concerned they should spread the pain around. But that's why they didn't include State Parks owned lands. You can bet there was figuring going on. They figured there would be significant political blow back from requiring it on the beaches where people go to recreate. Way more people use the beaches than any other state land. Hunters are a small minority who they think have unlimited deep pockets. So they won't get stung in the voting booth like they would for requiring the pass on the beaches.

The ironic part is, they are doing this to fund State Parks and State Parks owns the beaches so what better source of revenue? But they include DNR land that is undeveloped and has nothing to do with State Parks.

[lokidog]

Wait til they start charging all the clam diggers $30 to park on the beach. This is the same thing.

The only reason they don't is because while the coastal beaches are owned by State Parks, it is not considered a State Park, but rather the Seashore Conservation Area. The Discover Pass bill requires the pass in State Parks, not State Park lands.

Had the legislation required the Discover Pass on State Park LANDS (similar to WDFW and DNR lands) the Pass would be required.

As far as I'm concerned they should spread the pain around. But that's why they didn't include State Parks owned lands. You can bet there was figuring going on. They figured there would be significant political blow back from requiring it on the beaches where people go to recreate. Way more people use the beaches than any other state land. Hunters are a small minority who they think have unlimited deep pockets. So they won't get stung in the voting booth like they would for requiring the pass on the beaches.

The ironic part is, they are doing this to fund State Parks and State Parks owns the beaches so what better source of revenue? But they include DNR land that is undeveloped and has nothing to do with State Parks.

100% 

[bigtex]

Wait til they start charging all the clam diggers $30 to park on the beach. This is the same thing.

The only reason they don't is because while the coastal beaches are owned by State Parks, it is not considered a State Park, but rather the Seashore Conservation Area. The Discover Pass bill requires the pass in State Parks, not State Park lands.

Had the legislation required the Discover Pass on State Park LANDS (similar to WDFW and DNR lands) the Pass would be required.

As far as I'm concerned they should spread the pain around. But that's why they didn't include State Parks owned lands. You can bet there was figuring going on. They figured there would be significant political blow back from requiring it on the beaches where people go to recreate. Way more people use the beaches than any other state land. Hunters are a small minority who they think have unlimited deep pockets. So they won't get stung in the voting booth like they would for requiring the pass on the beaches.

The ironic part is, they are doing this to fund State Parks and State Parks owns the beaches so what better source of revenue? But they include DNR land that is undeveloped and has nothing to do with State Parks.

100% 

[xd2005]

Do the funds go towards state parks or state park lands?

[bigtex]

Do the funds go towards state parks or state park lands?

The agencies in general

[Pinetar]

BigTex,

Last year if you were staying at a state campground (like Banks Lake) you didn't have to buy the discovery pass since you were paying for the campgrounds. Is this still the same or do you now have to also buy the DP?

[bigtex]

BigTex,

Last year if you were staying at a state campground (like Banks Lake) you didn't have to buy the discovery pass since you were paying for the campgrounds. Is this still the same or do you now have to also buy the DP?

No change

[Pinetar]

Thanks Big Tex, I was hoping this wouln't change