Author Topic: delete (Read 57456 times)

cboom · « **on:** June 06, 2012, 11:33:00 PM »

delete

bobcat · « **Reply #1 on:** June 06, 2012, 11:42:29 PM »

Good post. I agree with all of it. I have the same issues with the Discover pass, yet, like you, I agree that it's fair for people to pay for the things that they use. I think State Parks should have their own pass and DNR should have their own pass. The DNR pass should only be required if you use developed recreational sites like campgrounds and ORV trailheads/parking lots. So for most of us hunters, we would not need a pass for DNR lands, and we are already covered on Fish & Wildlife lands with the pass that comes with our hunting license. So really what it boils down to, in my opinion, is that the Discover pass should have always been only for State Parks, especially since 84% of the revenue from the sales of the pass goes to them anyway. DNR should have come up with their own pass, or some other way of charging people for using campgrounds and such on state lands.

And I agree about the current two car limit- it's still not good enough. If you buy a pass it should be valid on any vehicle you happen to be driving at the time.

RB · « **Reply #2 on:** June 06, 2012, 11:53:00 PM »

I have no problem paying a fee to use some areas. The problem I have is the money I spend goes to a general fund and "improvements" are not always made in a timely fashion. I now have to pay $15 to launch my boat at a ramp that was free for years, or I can buy a $90 annual pass. Now if the county improves the ramps and makes better parking and easier access I won't mind spending the money.

kentrek · « **Reply #3 on:** June 07, 2012, 01:52:21 AM »

i also hate paying for the "general fund " type stuff...how many different fees and permits does a guy need to go play ? realy start adding it up..its mind bogling

RoyBoy · « **Reply #4 on:** June 07, 2012, 02:04:59 AM »

well the only reason im so for it is because hopefully it will help keep out the people who dump trash and $h!t all over in the woods. maybe help clean some of the places up a bit too

kentrek · « **Reply #5 on:** June 07, 2012, 02:29:15 AM »

Quote from: RoyBoy on June 07, 2012, 02:04:59 AM

well the only reason im so for it is because hopefully it will help keep out the people who dump trash and $h!t all over in the woods. maybe help clean some of the places up a bit too

no way is this going to stop peaple dumping trash...also im climbing mt st helens in a month or so and need a 25 dollor pass to go above 5k feet..what exactly does that money go toward ? do they maintian the mountain above 5k ? its a joke in my view with my current understanding...the mtn and woods seemd to be doing just fine befor the permits went up

boneaddict · « **Reply #6 on:** June 07, 2012, 04:58:28 AM »

I'd be more for it if it was more consistent. You have to sit and have negotiations with yourself whether or not you need it.....WDFW pass good enough or not etc. It would also be nice if they had some sort of "Forever" pass, one that was good for federal AND state, or anywhere if you will, so I don't have to worry about which one is on my mirror.

Then enforce the damn thing. I am tired of seeing people without it using the same land I have "paid" for without one.

3nails · « **Reply #7 on:** June 07, 2012, 05:29:01 AM »

I hate it. It's our land paid for with our taxes. I'll give you a different example. It's like you hired a maid to keep YOUR house clean. She/he gets greedy and decides to charge you an EXTRA $30 to use your own bathroom. Get out of MY house. YOU'RE FIRED!!!!!!!

Curly · « **Reply #8 on:** June 07, 2012, 08:26:41 AM »

Quote from: bobcat on June 06, 2012, 11:42:29 PM

Good post. I agree with all of it. I have the same issues with the Discover pass, yet, like you, I agree that it's fair for people to pay for the things that they use. I think State Parks should have their own pass and DNR should have their own pass. The DNR pass should only be required if you use developed recreational sites like campgrounds and ORV trailheads/parking lots. So for most of us hunters, we would not need a pass for DNR lands, and we are already covered on Fish & Wildlife lands with the pass that comes with our hunting license. So really what it boils down to, in my opinion, is that the Discover pass should have always been only for State Parks, especially since 84% of the revenue from the sales of the pass goes to them anyway. DNR should have come up with their own pass, or some other way of charging people for using campgrounds and such on state lands.

And I agree about the current two car limit- it's still not good enough. If you buy a pass it should be valid on any vehicle you happen to be driving at the time.

The only place on DNR land the DP should be required is at campgrounds and to park at maintained trailheads. And it should be separate from Parks.

CAMPMEAT · « **Reply #9 on:** June 07, 2012, 08:37:01 AM »

Against.

farmin4u_98948 · « **Reply #10 on:** June 07, 2012, 08:41:11 AM »

As it is I am against it mainly because they came up with the 30$$$ fee and then restricted it to now 2 vehicles . If it would be 10 $$ or something more reasonable I would have no problem. I trailer my jeep so I need 2 passes to go on state land. 20 bucks would be ok but 60$$$ is unreasonable........

lokidog · « **Reply #11 on:** June 07, 2012, 08:42:14 AM »

Quote from: Curly on June 07, 2012, 08:26:41 AM

Quote from: bobcat on June 06, 2012, 11:42:29 PM
Good post. I agree with all of it. I have the same issues with the Discover pass, yet, like you, I agree that it's fair for people to pay for the things that they use. I think State Parks should have their own pass and DNR should have their own pass. The DNR pass should only be required if you use developed recreational sites like campgrounds and ORV trailheads/parking lots. So for most of us hunters, we would not need a pass for DNR lands, and we are already covered on Fish & Wildlife lands with the pass that comes with our hunting license. So really what it boils down to, in my opinion, is that the Discover pass should have always been only for State Parks, especially since 84% of the revenue from the sales of the pass goes to them anyway. DNR should have come up with their own pass, or some other way of charging people for using campgrounds and such on state lands.

And I agree about the current two car limit- it's still not good enough. If you buy a pass it should be valid on any vehicle you happen to be driving at the time.

The only place on DNR land the DP should be required is at campgrounds and to park at maintained trailheads. And it should be separate from Parks.

I agree to pay to play, IF your playing costs the state something, like at maintained trailheads or campgrounds. The garbage dumpers will just drive through and dump anyways.

I have not bought one, and not sure I will, until I have to. Do bicycles need one? Maybe I'll park on the side of a non-DNR road, then bike in to hunt.

washingtonmuley · « **Reply #12 on:** June 07, 2012, 08:42:30 AM »

Against!!!!!!!

buckfvr · « **Reply #13 on:** June 07, 2012, 08:46:21 AM »

ORV tags pay for facilities designated for ORVs....the state is double dipping, we already pay......and pay....and pay. Problem is they spend more than we pay, we pay more than enough, they spend way too much.

CAMPMEAT · « **Reply #14 on:** June 07, 2012, 08:54:55 AM »

Quote from: buckfvr on June 07, 2012, 08:46:21 AM

ORV tags pay for facilities designated for ORVs....the state is double dipping, we already pay......and pay....and pay. Problem is they spend more than we pay, we pay more than enough, they spend way too much.

NOVA funds come to mind ..... stolen from us !!

Hunting Washington Forum

News:

Advertisement