2015 WA House Bill 1033 Giving Tools to WDFW For Access to Private Land

[bowbuild]

The only thing I would add is this should ONLY take place during hunting seasons, after hunting seasons March-August big timber needs to be responsible for themselves and shut their gates.  This would be good for wildlife, and better for their lands as there are few people to report crimes in the off seasons.

[JimmyHoffa]

The only thing I would add is this should ONLY take place during hunting seasons, after hunting seasons March-August big timber needs to be responsible for themselves and shut their gates.  This would be good for wildlife, and better for their lands as there are few people to report crimes in the off seasons.

Since it is WDFW, my guess is that it would be used for boat launches too.  Quite a few have been closed down by private owners because of dumping.  Those were some of the main places I think of when I heard about paying to remove garbage.  The volume dumped at boat launches can be quite a bit, and I'd imagine the cost is too.  That's kind of why I was wondering how much in the fund before it gets depleted.

[csaaphill]

I get the skeptickcism for what if this money runs out since it prolly will really quick, but thinking if it a tax that is already collected and not used it will fill back up quick enough to be ready for the next season.

[bigtex]

Haven't voted yet.  There was a question, as yet unanswered... where does this money go now from the toxic whatever tax and how will that entity make up for some of their $$ being taken away?  Will they have to create a new tax on something to keep their revenue flow going?

Sorry didn't see your question, which is a good question.

The money that is currently being collected can be distributed to fund 24 different litter, toxins, waste, etc cleanup activities. This bill would simply make it number 25. Additionally, any money left over (if any) from these established activities must be transfered to WDFW for this program.

[blackdog]

Could some of the no votes help me understand their opposition to the bill?

[lokidog]

Haven't voted yet.  There was a question, as yet unanswered... where does this money go now from the toxic whatever tax and how will that entity make up for some of their $$ being taken away?  Will they have to create a new tax on something to keep their revenue flow going?

Sorry didn't see your question, which is a good question.

The money that is currently being collected can be distributed to fund 24 different litter, toxins, waste, etc cleanup activities. This bill would simply make it number 25. Additionally, any money left over (if any) from these established activities must be transfered to WDFW for this program.

Thanks for the reply.  There is no state tax money, IMO, that goes unspent, so I still wonder what other litter or toxic waste cleanup activity will be shorted and what will they want taxed in order to make up the shortfall.

[bigtex]

Haven't voted yet.  There was a question, as yet unanswered... where does this money go now from the toxic whatever tax and how will that entity make up for some of their $$ being taken away?  Will they have to create a new tax on something to keep their revenue flow going?

Sorry didn't see your question, which is a good question.

The money that is currently being collected can be distributed to fund 24 different litter, toxins, waste, etc cleanup activities. This bill would simply make it number 25. Additionally, any money left over (if any) from these established activities must be transfered to WDFW for this program.

Thanks for the reply.  There is no state tax money, IMO, that goes unspent, so I still wonder what other litter or toxic waste cleanup activity will be shorted and what will they want taxed in order to make up the shortfall.

Actually I disagree. There are some accounts that have a surplus. It seems like this litter/waste account must be a healthy one because there was a proposal last year (maybe 2 years ago) to help fund State Parks off of it.

I also think we need to consider just how much money would WDFW be using. I don't think WDFW is going to be paying out millions of dollars in cleanup costs. Need to remember that this $ is solely for cleanup costs. WDFW isn't going to just give $ to landowners to provide access. They will either pay for any damage associated with public access, or do the repairs themselves via funding from this account.

[lokidog]

If this is indeed the case, then I would probably be for it... IF... it is the government after all and they don't seem to be able to do much financially very well.   

Who would oversee this?  Would the money for this person(s) time spent on this come out of the same fund or would someone just be pulled from some other duties? Of course we all know there is a lot of middle/upper management that could be given more work without increasing their work load.      

[csaaphill]

whats the odds that Insley would sign this then?
and what numbers or landowners we talking about then?
It says WDFW will enter into contracts with landowners so is there a list of landowers already taged for this project, or will that come later?
and good hope they come my way maybe some of these people around here will loosen up!

[bigtex]

Could some of the no votes help me understand their opposition to the bill?

Simple. Lots of people on here don't like new laws. Lot's of people think these lands should be forced to be open to the public and that the state shouldn't have to pay a dime.

[JimmyHoffa]

Could some of the no votes help me understand their opposition to the bill?

Simple. Lots of people on here don't like new laws. Lot's of people think these lands should be forced to be open to the public and that the state shouldn't have to pay a dime.

I haven't decided about this proposed item yet.  The intent sounds nice, but there is a thing about unintended consequences.
I really don't know of too many people anywhere that like laws, new or existing.  If everyone did everything using common sense there would be NO laws or government.  But that's unrealistic.

[stevemiller]

I like laws,Not all laws but Im glad there are laws that I feel protect my best interests.Some people even like over reaching laws That Im sure of,But only if it benefits their own personal life and Takes away from others.

[stevemiller]

In this new law that bigtex brought up,It gives landowners incentive.Why you say do they need incentive well for one all the antis that are against it will surely give the land owner problems for allowing certain user groups to use his private land.We have all seen that time and time again,so with out this law in place where and when they accept payment for this that or the other they will be bound to allow said user groups in the deal to use the property whether an anti group tries to put and end to a certain user group(hunters) from being able to benefit from said deal.That would need to be a NEW law on the books.

[dreamunelk]

If it helps keep lands open I am for it.  Hunters don't realize that a lot of garbage shows up on timber lands during hunting season.  Gates closed all year, open for hunting season.  Take a drive through Campbell and Green diamond land in North river.  Pretty much spotless before they opened the gates this year.  Why, because WDFW & Master Hunters went through and cleaned it last year after hunting season.  They will be cleaning it up again this year.   Most of it beer cans and coffee cups chucked out the window of ethical hunters along with dump sites from locals who save up their garbage for hunting season and hunters who decided it was a good time to clean out the back of the truck.   If not cleaned up it will not be open next year.  That's the hand shake deal for public access.  Oh and can't forget the target trash.  Very said and discouraging.  My estimate is there will be a few tons picked up this year just because they opened the gates for hunters.

The plus on this tax is it is not focused no hunters. 

Kind of wish the wording included fishing as there is a lot access denied because of the slobs.

[buckfvr]

Give us the nuts and bolts of the deal, who what when where and why............transparency is probably too revealing as they probably want the law first, and then see where they can get with it............Should be some info available that would make  it credible......Id think if there was, they would.