Adventure Pass

[Sitka_Blacktail]

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/ci_19974329

Not sure if this case will affect the Discover Pass program the State of Washington is running, but it looks like we are now free to use undeveloped National Forest land free of charge.

[dreamingbig]

Finally.  I think this ruling definitely helps!

[bigtex]

This ruling has no effect on the Discover Pass, or any other state pass in WA.

It may also not have an effect on any effect on federal passes in WA. The "Adventure Pass" is a USFS pass in California only, and it is essentially required to even enter national forests in undeveloped areas. Whereas in WA the only "fee areas" I know managed by feds are developed areas such as trailheads and campgrounds.

[400out]

My truck is going to look like a meixcans taxi with all the crap I'm going to have hanging in my windows 

[ghosthunter]

This ruling has no effect on the Discover Pass, or any other state pass in WA.

It may also not have an effect on any effect on federal passes in WA. The "Adventure Pass" is a USFS pass in California only, and it is essentially required to even enter national forests in undeveloped areas. Whereas in WA the only "fee areas" I know managed by feds are developed areas such as trailheads and campgrounds.

Well unless I a reading wrong. They ruled that the FS could not charge you to park in  an area where a majority of amenities were present if you did not use the amenties. No where does it say a trail is a amenity.
There are lots of places in this state that you are charged at a trail head just for parking. on federal lands. And several places I have hunted that they brought in porta podies. The ruling says permanent restrooms.

[ghosthunter]

Also i think the same arguments could be used against the state at least where they are demanding a pass to cross or drive on undeveloped state lands. If the argument is that this is double taxing, Why wouldn't it work?

And why would it not w0rk on Wildlife areas? All the ones I have been on are undeveloped.

[bigtex]

This ruling has no effect on the Discover Pass, or any other state pass in WA.

It may also not have an effect on any effect on federal passes in WA. The "Adventure Pass" is a USFS pass in California only, and it is essentially required to even enter national forests in undeveloped areas. Whereas in WA the only "fee areas" I know managed by feds are developed areas such as trailheads and campgrounds.

Well unless I a reading wrong. They ruled that the FS could not charge you to park in  an area where a majority of amenities were present if you did not use the amenties. No where does it say a trail is a amenity.
There are lots of places in this state that you are charged at a trail head just for parking. on federal lands. And several places I have hunted that they brought in porta podies. The ruling says permanent restrooms.

Here is the federal law definition of "amenity" for recreational fees:

(f) Standard Amenity Recreation Fee.--Except as limited by subsection (d), the Secretary may charge a standard amenity recreation fee for Federal recreational lands and waters under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, or the Forest Service, but only at the following:
(1) A National Conservation Area.
(2) A National Volcanic Monument.
(3) A destination visitor or interpretive center that provides a broad range of interpretive services, programs, and media.
(4) An area--
(A) that provides significant opportunities for outdoor recreation;
(B) that has substantial Federal investments;
(C) where fees can be efficiently collected; and
(D) that contains all of the following amenities:
(i) Designated developed parking.
(ii) A permanent toilet facility.
(iii) A permanent trash receptacle.
(iv) Interpretive sign, exhibit, or kiosk.
(v) Picnic tables.
(vi) Security services.

So under the recreational fee law if a site has developed parking, a permanent toilet, permanent garbage can, some type of info sign, picnic table, and security (such as LE or agency personnel patrolling) then fees can be charged.

The problem with the Adventure Pass is the USFS required it at entire areas, very similar to how the Discover Pass is required at entire areas such as a whole state forest. Whereas with the USFS pass for WA it is only required at certain areas such as trailheads, which as long as it has those items I listed it is legal.

[bigtex]

Also i think the same arguments could be used against the state at least where they are demanding a pass to cross or drive on undeveloped state lands. If the argument is that this is double taxing, Why wouldn't it work?

The argument for the lawsuit wasn't that it was double taxing, it was the USFS in California violated the requirements of the FLREA (which I just posted above).

"The court reversed a district court ruling, saying the federal authorities violated the 2004 Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (FLREA)."

[ghosthunter]

OK there are many trail heads that have a sign saying pass required but have none of the amenties.

[bobcat]

OK there are many trail heads that have a sign saying pass required but have none of the amenties.

    I was just going to say the same thing. In fact I can't think of any trailheads that I would use for hunting (in the Wenatchee NF), that have ANY of those amenities.   

[boneaddict]

I bet they have a sign and that is essentially what is required.  A sign and is "Patrolled".

[Skyvalhunter]

  and a parking spot

[Sitka_Blacktail]

This is pretty interesting, from the article.......

"The strongly worded, 15-page decision says any member of the public who walks, hikes, rides a horse, picnics on the side of a road, camps at undeveloped sites, even parks in a national forest "without using facilities and services" is allowed to do so without being charged. Charging a fee, such as the Adventure Pass, even for someone who visits an area with amenities but doesn't use them, violates the FLREA, according to the decision. "

And "Those who go to a place in the forest with "a majority of the nine amenities" such as picnic tables, permanent toilets, garbage cans and running water, may be charged, the court said.

However, the court's ruling concludes the federal statute says "individuals can go to a place offering facilities and services without using the facilities and services and without paying a fee."

"This includes not being charged simply to park, said the court. "

So it would appear that you can visit and park at a place that has the amenities, but as long as you aren't using them, you don't have to pay. Say you parked at a developed trail head with permanent outhouse, picnic area, and garbage cans, and as long as you just go hiking, they can't charge you from what I read.

And lastly this quote.....

"It (the 9th Circuit decision) is binding on all the western states."

So at least as far as USFS land, this decision is binding in Washington State.

Now to look into the laws governing the Discover Pass.

[Boss .300 winmag]

OK there are many trail heads that have a sign saying pass required but have none of the amenties.

[Skyvalhunter]

Maybe with this ruling that will change or they will trow out a picnic table