No more Discover Pass?

[fireweed]

I wouldn't mind paying slightly more if I could use all public lands without having to worry about remembering to bring the correct pass every time. My issue is the pass I need is often in one of our other vehicles.

So give more money , So they can give it to wildlife conflict people and piss it away , with no improvement to public lands.

Sure, why not. I said "slightly more." Like maybe a dollar or two. If it benefits me, why not? As it is, I buy a Discover pass and I have to decide which two vehicles out of the three we own, I'm going to use it for. Same with the WDFW pass. You're only allowed two license plate numbers on each one. If they did away with that issue, it would be worth a couple more dollars for sure.

The "hassle factor" of moving the passes between vehicles and making sure you have it at the right place and the right time is the biggest negative for me.  I also don't like that you need a DP for hunting on state land, and then the WDFW and DNR only get a tiny part of the $$.  I would rather see a broader fee where more people pay into it because public lands and state parks benefit the whole state, not just people who recreate there. 

[pianoman9701]

I get the feeling they gov't doesn't like the Discover Pass.  Only because it focuses on too small a user group for revenue.  Like stated earlier, a state wide tax on tabs or goods would increase the revenue exponentially and reduces the overhead associated with distributing, selling, and enforcing a pass.  They see the $$ potential, and they see an easy sell to the public.

They'll have a problem in their most populated districts because of the rail surcharge that's been levied in Pierce Co. (maybe King, too???). It would be fairer to charge everyone and it would be a lot less per person, but people are ticked now about paying $200-300 or more for their tabs overnight. Keep adding to that and we'll have another tax revolt that brings the tabs down to $30 again...so they can sneakily start finding excuses to raise them again over time.

[baker5150]

I get the feeling they gov't doesn't like the Discover Pass.  Only because it focuses on too small a user group for revenue.  Like stated earlier, a state wide tax on tabs or goods would increase the revenue exponentially and reduces the overhead associated with distributing, selling, and enforcing a pass.  They see the $$ potential, and they see an easy sell to the public.

They'll have a problem in their most populated districts because of the rail surcharge that's been levied in Pierce Co. (maybe King, too???). It would be fairer to charge everyone and it would be a lot less per person, but people are ticked now about paying $200-300 or more for their tabs overnight. Keep adding to that and we'll have another tax revolt that brings the tabs down to $30 again...so they can sneakily start finding excuses to raise them again over time.

Agreed, but the upside of a lower $ amount may turn enough voters in their favor. 
They can add $ to other areas as well, like outdoor goods, or a state wide "sugary drink" tax (what a joke that one is)

[Humptulips]

What are the "other State Recreation Passes" this new pass replaces?
If it goes to an addition onto the car license I didn't see any mention of where the money would go.
They mentioned $7 to $15 per vehicle. You get two vehicle use for one pass now. Two vehicles at $15 each doesn't sound cheaper to me. It will be great if you are out of State.
The only reason for this is to squeeze more money out of us or they wouldn't be thinking about it.

[JeffRaines]

I will say the idea to get rid of the discover pass itself is a great one. We live in a day where the police have access to all your information in their car, why the hell do I have to bother buying a piece of paper that proves I'm authorized to access land? To top it off, its not like the america the beautiful or NF passes where its valid on any vehicle, I still have to validate it for two vehicles only! Why not just buy it on WDFW, put in your two vehicles and you're done.

[Pegasus]

I am in favor of placing a $10.00 fee on top of the car tabs of all the vehicles in the state to give us free hunting and fishing licenses. 

[jstone]

US Hunters and Fishermen already pay enough. I do get the hikers who don’t hunt an fish should have to pay something to help. WE PAY ENOUGH

[trophyhunt]

US Hunters and Fishermen already pay enough. I do get the hikers who don’t hunt an fish should have to pay something to help. WE PAY ENOUGH

that is why I’ve never bought one!

[Curly]

Pass-Free Access Package
This is the preferred recommendation of the voting members of the Leadership Team, concluding that it is the best fit with the guiding principles/parameters of the proviso. This package replaces the Discover Pass and other state recreation passes with a source of broad-based public funding, resulting in the simplest, most consistent and equitable fee system and stable funding for land management agencies. Broad-based public funding reduces the need for exemptions and discounted passes. The funding source given the most consideration was a mandatory public land management fee at the time of vehicle registration; however, the Leadership Team did not prescribe this source and was open to other funding methods. With more Washingtonians supporting public land management, further fiscal analysis on a registration fee should begin in the $7-15 per vehicle range. Under this package, agency budgets should still include allocations from the State General Fund.

I'm glad they are leaning in this direction.  I don't like the $7 - $15 per vehicle range.  Seems to me that $7 would be a more appropriate upper limit.

I've always thought that every citizen should help pay for State Parks.  (Which is the agency that the DP was created to fund.)  State Parks already have user fees by way of fees charged for staying in campgrounds.  I don't know why they can't seem to bring in enough money to cover their costs, but apparently they can't figure it out.  (I suspect their costs are out of control).

I never liked the idea of the DP being a backhanded way of milking outdoorsmen for covering costs of State Parks.  Parks benefit everyone one in the State and thus should be funded by everyone.

Personally, I'd rather see a slight increase in sales tax to cover the loss of fees for removal of the DP; that way even the Bums living on the street will pay for some of it when they go and buy their smokes and alcohol with the cash they've begged from suckers willing to give them their hard earned money.

[Eric M]

This is the state that had voters vote whether or not they wanted a baseball stadium, voted against it by a slight margin, and then built it anyway. They know what's best for you.

[Special T]

Curly hit the issues squarely. This is about funding parks. The passes were an attempt to get Peter to pay for Paul's use of parks. The legislature just needs to make some hard choices on general fund spending and which parks are more valuable.

I heard on the Radio Oregon is going to a scaled camping fee system to 1 raise more $ & to get folks to try out underutilized parks.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[jmscon]

Not sure where the shortfall in funds came from originally ($30 car tabs?) but the state was hoping to make $60 some million a year on the Discover Pass and has come way short. According to an article, over a year ago in the Harold, the state hasn’t made half of what they projected (big surprise). By 2016 numbers, a $10 increase in tabs for state parks would generate ~$75 million annually!
The only thing that I like about the discover pass is that the user pays more to play than the non users.

[Humptulips]

Not sure where the shortfall in funds came from originally ($30 car tabs?) but the state was hoping to make $60 some million a year on the Discover Pass and has come way short. According to an article, over a year ago in the Harold, the state hasn’t made half of what they projected (big surprise). By 2016 numbers, a $10 increase in tabs for state parks would generate ~$75 million annually!
The only thing that I like about the discover pass is that the user pays more to play than the non users.

Harold who? Too funny to pass up.

[NRA4LIFE]

What surprised me a bit was something I was told by the park ranger at Pacific Beach SP earlier this month.  When you pay to camp at SP's you don't need a Discover Pass.  Your camping permit is sufficient. 

I don't believe there is anyway we are going to get fees reduced by this state, period.  It will only get worse.  And I don't believe that people who never use SP's or state land should be required to pay in any way.  The state needs to manage the SP money better.  But, it's run by imbiciles, so that will never happen.

[Boss .300 winmag]

What surprised me a bit was something I was told by the park ranger at Pacific Beach SP earlier this month.  When you pay to camp at SP's you don't need a Discover Pass.  Your camping permit is sufficient. 

I don't believe there is anyway we are going to get fees reduced by this state, period.  It will only get worse.  And I don't believe that people who never use SP's or state land should be required to pay in any way.  The state needs to manage the SP money better.  But, it's run by imbiciles, so that will never happen.

Ah pacific beach, I stay at the Navy lodge there.