Post by: Humptulips on December 28, 2010, 06:53:49 PM
Information has just come to light that the new Public Lands Commissioner Peter Goldmark is proposing giving tribe’s access behind closed/locked gates on DNR lands where you and I are not afforded the same opportunity. It is bad enough that tribes harvest trophy bulls for supposed sustenance and do not allow WDFW to know how many were harvested to help maintain herd population objectives. Now Goldmark wants to let them behind locked gates. They will have access to more land, animals and be able to simply drive the carcass right out! What is next?
Our DNR Region Enforcement team is meeting with WDFW Enforcement this week to discuss the complications and repercussions this could have.
We contacted our Regional DNR office here in Ellensburg and confirmed everything.
It should also be noted that inside sources are saying that Goldmark is simply keeping a campaign promise to the tribes in return for their support in his election. They were some of his biggest supporters. See additional attached sheets.
Contributions from Tribes over $500 to Goldmark
Does not include donations from individual tribe members
CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND BANDS OF THE YAKAMA NATION 9/29/2008 $1,600.00 G TOPPENISH WA 989480151
MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE 9/29/2008 $1,600.00 G AUBURN WA 980929763
NISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE 8/18/2008 $1,600.00 P OLYMPIA WA 985139105
SWINOMISH TRIBAL COMMUNITY 10/8/2008 $1,600.00 G LA CONNER WA 982570817
PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS 11/3/2008 $800.00 G TACOMA WA 984044926
SPOKANE TRIBE OF INDIANS 10/9/2008 $500.00 G WELLPINIT WA 990400100
SQUAXIN ISLAND TRIBE 9/15/2008 $500.00 G SHELTON WA 985848074
SUQUAMISH INDIAN TRIBE 7/30/2008 $500.00 P SUQUAMISH WA 983920617
Post by: billythekidrock on December 28, 2010, 06:56:56 PM
They keep gating and blocking access to the public, only to give free range to others. How pathetic.
Post by: Tony 270 on December 28, 2010, 06:59:38 PM
Post by: dscubame on December 28, 2010, 07:00:55 PM
Post by: bigtex on December 28, 2010, 07:06:28 PM
Our DNR Region Enforcement team is meeting with WDFW Enforcement this week to discuss the complications and repercussions this could have.
There are 7 DNR Enforcement Officers to cover all DNR owned lands in this state. To see how much land one DNR Officer covers check out this map: http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_les_region_contact_map.pdf (http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_les_region_contact_map.pdf)
Each region has one officer, only one region has a second officer. There is also a DNR Enforcement Chief in Olympia.
Think there is going to be a lack of enforcement for this?????? :bash: :bash:
Post by: logger on December 28, 2010, 07:12:48 PM
Post by: Humptulips on December 28, 2010, 07:17:30 PM
No Help on posting the documents? l
Post by: bigtex on December 28, 2010, 07:23:43 PM
What would they need to enforce? It's a *censored* free for all, nothing to enforce.
There are other things they could do that would still be against the law such as driving off the roads, ATV's, DUI, drugs and so on.
Post by: Little Dave on December 28, 2010, 07:25:07 PM
Post by: Humptulips on December 28, 2010, 07:32:01 PM
You should be able to post a document by choosing Additional Options... below. Then click the [Browse...] button.Thanks, You have my permission to call me a dummy but I can't seem to make it work.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 28, 2010, 07:34:11 PM
Post by: logger on December 28, 2010, 07:36:12 PM
Post by: whacker1 on December 28, 2010, 07:43:17 PM
Post by: bigtex on December 28, 2010, 07:44:33 PM
Another reason that consolidating DNR and WDFW sucks. Peter Goldmark ends up in command.....
There is no proposal to merge DNR and WDFW. Just WDFW, State Parks, and DNR's Enforcement and Heritage Progams will merge. All other parts of DNR will be in tact as their own agency.
Post by: whacker1 on December 28, 2010, 07:46:12 PM
Another reason that consolidating DNR and WDFW sucks. Peter Goldmark ends up in command.....
There is no proposal to merge DNR and WDFW. Just WDFW, State Parks, and DNR's Enforcement and Heritage Progams will merge. All other parts of DNR will be in tact as their own agency.
The legislative session hasn't even begun yet. Lets have this conversation again in 3-4 months when they still haven't found the 4.6 billion they need to balance the budget. :twocents:
Post by: billythekidrock on December 28, 2010, 07:46:25 PM
Another reason that consolidating DNR and WDFW sucks. Peter Goldmark ends up in command.....
No he wouldn't. He will still run the majority of DNR as DNR. He will still be an elected official rather than appointed.
Post by: bigtex on December 28, 2010, 07:47:34 PM
Are these the same DNR gates that the brushpickers have keys to? I've heard that the brushpickers pay for permits, so would the tribes be permit exempt?
DNR gates are usually large and blue.
They give keys to brushpickers because DNR is essentially a state-run timber company and like many other timber companies they let people come in for a fee (pickers pay DNR) and pick brush. It's just like how people can pick commercial quantities of brush on National Forests for a fee.
Post by: logger on December 28, 2010, 07:50:09 PM
Post by: ser300wsm on December 28, 2010, 07:50:34 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on December 28, 2010, 07:51:08 PM
Are these the same DNR gates that the brushpickers have keys to? I've heard that the brushpickers pay for permits, so would the tribes be permit exempt?
DNR gates are usually large and blue.
They give keys to brushpickers because DNR is essentially a state-run timber company and like many other timber companies they let people come in for a fee (pickers pay DNR) and pick brush. It's just like how people can pick commercial quantities of brush on National Forests for a fee.
Depends on the area. On the coast blue gates are typically Rayonier. Most DNR gates are yellow.
Post by: bigtex on December 28, 2010, 07:53:07 PM
Are these the same DNR gates that the brushpickers have keys to? I've heard that the brushpickers pay for permits, so would the tribes be permit exempt?
DNR gates are usually large and blue.
They give keys to brushpickers because DNR is essentially a state-run timber company and like many other timber companies they let people come in for a fee (pickers pay DNR) and pick brush. It's just like how people can pick commercial quantities of brush on National Forests for a fee.
Depends on the area. On the coast blue gates are typically Rayonier. Most DNR gates are yellow.
Ya forgot about Rayonier. Then again most Rayonier gates i've seen are typically a pale/sky blue while DNR are darker. I do know the DNR gates on the east side and the eastside of Puget Sound are blue.
Post by: logger on December 28, 2010, 07:54:46 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on December 28, 2010, 07:57:41 PM
Are these the same DNR gates that the brushpickers have keys to? I've heard that the brushpickers pay for permits, so would the tribes be permit exempt?
DNR gates are usually large and blue.
They give keys to brushpickers because DNR is essentially a state-run timber company and like many other timber companies they let people come in for a fee (pickers pay DNR) and pick brush. It's just like how people can pick commercial quantities of brush on National Forests for a fee.
Depends on the area. On the coast blue gates are typically Rayonier. Most DNR gates are yellow.
Ya forgot about Rayonier. Then again most Rayonier gates i've seen are typically a pale/sky blue while DNR are darker. I do know the DNR gates on the east side and the eastside of Puget Sound are blue.
I think alot of it depends on who owned it prior to land exchanges. I know the gates in the Capitol Forest are all yellow, except a few on the perimeter that were previously owned by private timber companies.
Post by: billythekidrock on December 28, 2010, 08:00:37 PM
What the hell , rip out all the gates and not even worry about who's is who's, man i cannot get over this.
I hear ya.
It is hard enough for me to swallow the fact that a brush picker can purchase a permit that allows a key and or quads yet they do not enforce any littering laws that these aholes break. Try and ask if you can purchase the same permit to gain access and you will be told no.
Now to give another group or tribe special treatment. WTF! :bash:
Post by: BlackRidge on December 28, 2010, 08:02:45 PM
Just glad some kind of investigation is in the works >:(
Post by: SuperDave on December 28, 2010, 08:09:53 PM
Post by: logger on December 28, 2010, 08:15:01 PM
Post by: Special T on December 28, 2010, 08:18:45 PM
Post by: logger on December 28, 2010, 08:22:19 PM
Post by: Gobble Gobble on December 28, 2010, 10:10:24 PM
Post by: bobcat on December 28, 2010, 11:23:19 PM
Post by: raekmike on December 28, 2010, 11:54:14 PM
When i walk in 2 miles to find a rig, and no dnr or wdfw are obviously going to be there,
My buck 110 might fall into a tires sidewall on accident...
Better yet my valve stem core puller might accidently loosen a core (like my speeding neighbor) :dunno:
Post by: ICEMAN on December 29, 2010, 06:00:48 AM
Let's not let this lay..... we need a group consensus and plan.
Post by: Gobble Gobble on December 29, 2010, 07:39:11 AM
Post by: huntingfool7 on December 29, 2010, 07:53:25 AM
Post by: halflife65 on December 29, 2010, 08:01:33 AM
Post by: WDFW-SUX on December 29, 2010, 08:18:10 AM
See were losing badly.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on December 29, 2010, 08:25:51 AM
Then the county started charging excessive amounts to dump garbage,and it was the beginning of the end. Arsholes began dumping everything they could for free and the gate was the answer. These kind of people RUINED a great way of life.
If the gates are there,NO special treatment for tribes. If they do,I'll order some keys Logger.
Post by: BlackRidge on December 29, 2010, 08:30:32 AM
I don't know what to say about this- except I don't think I want to live in this state anymore. :bash:
Seems to be a popular thought nowadays, this place is going downhill fast
Would pushing this on the local news orgs help at all? Get King/Kiro/Komo to start asking questions, bringing this to the general publics attention, etc
Post by: grundy53 on December 29, 2010, 08:34:47 AM
Post by: PolarBear on December 29, 2010, 09:02:07 AM
Post by: WDFW-SUX on December 29, 2010, 09:19:08 AM
Post by: bobcat on December 29, 2010, 10:14:11 AM
So what reason does the DNR give for the gates that are closed right now? What's the purpose of having them locked?
It's because of people dumping garbage in the woods, and lately there's been a lot of timber theft. Yes, people actually going in with a log truck and stealing trees at night. >:(
Post by: Curly on December 29, 2010, 10:14:29 AM
I don't know what to say about this- except I don't think I want to live in this state anymore. :bash:
Idaho is looking better all the time.
Post by: Pathfinder101 on December 29, 2010, 10:17:23 AM
I don't know why you guys are even surprised....he went to Cal Berkeley....
But...but....but.... his political ads when he was running for Congress said that he was an "Okanogan Rancher".... :rolleyes:
:bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:
Post by: WDFW-SUX on December 29, 2010, 10:20:35 AM
He's as left as they come.
Post by: Pathfinder101 on December 29, 2010, 10:53:56 AM
Too bad we can vote, and some of us can even read enough to know that putting a white cowboy hat on his election sign doesn't mean we are voting for "the good guy"...
Post by: whacker1 on December 29, 2010, 11:48:36 AM
Post by: Stomper on December 29, 2010, 12:48:23 PM
Post by: MtnMuley on December 29, 2010, 12:53:46 PM
I know pathfinder that's the best part... He plays up the awe shucks Im a good ole boy thing and the first thing he does is screw over every single one of his neighbors...funny isnt it...
He's as left as they come.
I got a C-Note that says he won't win his own county in the next election. ;) Pretty sad in small-town country.
Post by: Pathfinder101 on December 29, 2010, 12:55:30 PM
I know pathfinder that's the best part... He plays up the awe shucks Im a good ole boy thing and the first thing he does is screw over every single one of his neighbors...funny isnt it...
He's as left as they come.
I got a C-Note that says he won't win his own county in the next election. ;)
If we can get the word out, he won't win ANY Eastern WA counties...
Post by: MtnMuley on December 29, 2010, 12:56:32 PM
Post by: Pathfinder101 on December 29, 2010, 12:58:52 PM
The word is more than out, pathfinder. If only we could have some say in King County. :(
Yeah, the word is out amongst US, because we hunt and we give a crap. I am talking about the general voting public. I am talking about commercials during the next election season...
Post by: Bigshooter on December 29, 2010, 01:00:52 PM
Post by: grundy53 on December 29, 2010, 01:06:47 PM
Post by: bobcat on December 29, 2010, 01:36:59 PM
Quote
Natural Resources Tribal Summit sought common ground with tribes on state land access, management and stewardship issues
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 15, 2010
Natural Resources Tribal Summit sought common ground with tribes on state land access, management and stewardship issues
Goldmark issues Commissioner’s Order pledging partnership with tribes
OLYMPIA – At the conclusion of a two-day summit with tribal representatives from across the state, Commissioner of Public Lands Peter Goldmark said the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) will expand its efforts to communicate and work with the tribes on resource management issues that affect them and the state lands they use.
“This summit marks the beginning of a new era in how DNR works with our state’s native peoples,” Goldmark said. “As stewards of 5.6 million acres of state-owned lands, DNR works for trust beneficiaries like schools and counties, but we must also give respect to the tribes and the cultural significance that these lands have for them.”
The summit – held September 13-14 – was hosted by the Nisqually Indian Tribe. It marked the first time that DNR had invited all 29 federally recognized Indian Tribes in Washington State to discuss natural resources issues at one table.
Goldmark said the summit is only the beginning to an ongoing discussion with the tribes. DNR will continue to invite tribes to meetings where its regional managers can hear their concerns about the department’s management of resource lands. DNR also plans to conduct another statewide Natural Resources Tribal Summit next year.
Goldmark’s official Commissioner’s Order also confirmed that DNR recognizes the tribes’ separate rights and authorities and commits the department to maintain government-to-government relations with them. DNR’s tribal relations program is led by a full-time Tribal Relations Manager, Rodney Cawston, who is a member of the Colville Tribe.
The full text of the Commissioner’s Order on Tribal Relations is online at: http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/em_comm_tribalrelations_order_201029.pdf (http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/em_comm_tribalrelations_order_201029.pdf)
Photos from the Natural Resources Tribal Summit are on Flickr at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wastatednr/sets/72157624839093043/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wastatednr/sets/72157624839093043/)
Additional information about DNR’s Tribal Relations Office can be found online at www.dnr.wa.gov (http://www.dnr.wa.gov) at the link to “Tribal Relations.” The direct link is: http://www.dnr.wa.gov/AboutDNR/TribalRelations/Pages/Home.aspx (http://www.dnr.wa.gov/AboutDNR/TribalRelations/Pages/Home.aspx)
DNR manages trust lands
DNR manages more than 5.6 million acres of state land:
2.9 million acres of trust lands, including forest, range, agricultural land, and commercial properties that earn revenue to build public schools, universities, prisons, and other state institutions, and help fund Westside county services.
2.6 million acres of ‘aquatic’ lands: the bedlands under Puget Sound and the coast, many beaches, and navigable natural lakes and rivers.
133,000 acres of natural areas that protect rare and threatened species as well as high-quality examples of the native ecosystems and landscapes of Washington.
Media Contact: Aaron Toso, Director of Communications and Outreach, 360-902-1149, aaron.toso@dnr.wa.gov
Post by: bobcat on December 29, 2010, 02:46:28 PM
Post by: MtnMuley on December 29, 2010, 04:10:49 PM
Post by: Houndhunter on December 29, 2010, 04:20:29 PM
Post by: bobcat on December 29, 2010, 07:11:58 PM
Post by: logger on December 29, 2010, 08:48:04 PM
Post by: grundy53 on December 29, 2010, 08:59:24 PM
Why not just give them the keys to northwest trek and point defiance zoo while were at it.I have the privledge of having to travel through certain reservations and make no mistake they gaurd those resevations as if there was agold mine around every corner. gaurd shacks, permits, tribal cops the whole nine yards. As far as I'm concerned if this is how we are going to have to play the game they need a passport to come off the reservation :twocents:
:yeah: how come all of the consessions are in one direction? we are always giving and they are always taking. They do not bring a single thing to the table. in other words they are worthless.
Post by: biggdogg on December 29, 2010, 09:19:56 PM
Post by: Gamblin Guy on December 29, 2010, 09:20:26 PM
Why not just give them the keys to northwest trek and point defiance zoo while were at it.I have the privledge of having to travel through certain reservations and make no mistake they gaurd those resevations as if there was agold mine around every corner. gaurd shacks, permits, tribal cops the whole nine yards. As far as I'm concerned if this is how we are going to have to play the game they need a passport to come off the reservation :twocents:
:yeah: how come all of the consessions are in one direction? we are always giving and they are always taking. They do not bring a single thing to the table. in other words they are worthless.
two words....CAMPAIGN DONATIONS!!
Its all public record and there for the reading with a little looking. The tribes have bought and paid for itwith the gambling dollars. cant help but laugh when i hear people complaining about them all the time and then frequenting the casinos.
Post by: logger on December 29, 2010, 09:45:36 PM
Each tribe gets 20 keys u have go and sign out for keys and have to give them back within a couple days. That's all i know and passports to leave the rez that's that's the dumbest thing i heard yet.Why is that so dumb? I have to purchase a permit to go through the tribes ground even when it's benefits the tribe. If I have to have a paper to enter a soverign nation, you should have to have one to leave it. Not trying to be a dick here, hell half of my family is yakama's, just trying to what's right is right and what's fair is fair.
Post by: billythekidrock on December 30, 2010, 05:36:28 AM
Each tribe gets 20 keys u have go and sign out for keys and have to give them back within a couple days. That's all i know and passports to leave the rez that's that's the dumbest thing i heard yet.Why is that so dumb? I have to purchase a permit to go through the tribes ground even when it's benefits the tribe. If I have to have a paper to enter a soverign nation, you should have to have one to leave it. Not trying to be a dick here, hell half of my family is yakama's, just trying to what's right is right and what's fair is fair.
:yeah:
Post by: Skyvalhunter on December 30, 2010, 05:39:34 AM
Post by: ICEMAN on December 30, 2010, 05:54:31 PM
Each tribe gets 20 keys u have go and sign out for keys and have to give them back within a couple days. That's all i know and passports to leave the rez that's that's the dumbest thing i heard yet.Why is that so dumb? I have to purchase a permit to go through the tribes ground even when it's benefits the tribe. If I have to have a paper to enter a soverign nation, you should have to have one to leave it. Not trying to be a dick here, hell half of my family is yakama's, just trying to what's right is right and what's fair is fair.
I have always wondered how the tribes are allowed to treat American cash as their currency.... Should not they have their own money being a sovereign nation?
Post by: BlackRidge on December 30, 2010, 06:07:47 PM
Each tribe gets 20 keys u have go and sign out for keys and have to give them back within a couple days. That's all i know and passports to leave the rez that's that's the dumbest thing i heard yet.Why is that so dumb? I have to purchase a permit to go through the tribes ground even when it's benefits the tribe. If I have to have a paper to enter a sovereign nation, you should have to have one to leave it. Not trying to be a dick here, hell half of my family is yakama's, just trying to what's right is right and what's fair is fair.
I have always wondered how the tribes are allowed to treat American cash as their currency.... Should not they have their own money being a sovereign nation?
I'm sure bottle caps would work :chuckle:
One would think so, but the feds seem pretty content with making concessions as a political tool. There is no fair :twocents:
Post by: logger on December 30, 2010, 06:49:43 PM
Post by: MtnMuley on December 30, 2010, 09:13:35 PM
Post by: logger on December 30, 2010, 09:14:42 PM
Post by: Pathfinder101 on December 31, 2010, 08:05:32 AM
Post by: logger on December 31, 2010, 09:26:41 AM
Nope. He'll run for reelection with the cowboy hat on his sign again.... and everyone will vote for him...
I hope not, I have a place in tonasket and quite a few people think he's a phony *censored* also, I had to deal with him once and he reminded me of one of those guy's who carries a stick around with a little *censored* on it and just spreads it around everywhere he goes.
Post by: bearpaw on December 31, 2010, 09:48:52 AM
Honestly though, if any group of people are given special opportunities, few will turn it down, so if you were given the opportunity to go through gates others couldn't, most people would do it. Then you would start getting used to special opportunities and expect more. So there you have it, it's the people in our government like Goldmark who are responsible for this reverse discrimination. Until enough Americans wake up and smell the progressive's coffee, you will continue to see more and more reverse discrimination by progressive democrats in power who are essentually buying votes from all the minorities. :twocents:
Post by: bearpaw on December 31, 2010, 09:54:01 AM
To me it's not about if your indian,black, pink or purple it's equal rights, If being their own nation is what they want then they should live with the benefits and repurcussions of being a stand on your own nation.They have their own courts,laws and everything else needed to be independent of the united states, so be independent. Reminds me of my kids, they are only my kids when there si something in it for them, the rest of the time i'm the *censored* who makes them be accountable.
I agree :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
The minorities are using every angle they can for special treatment. But as long as they keep getting their way they will keep trying and most any group would. Heck, every minority group in America is using the screwed up system to get what they want, even the illegals that shouldn't be here. :bash:
Post by: 280ackley on December 31, 2010, 10:03:16 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on December 31, 2010, 10:20:50 AM
I remember haveing a small debate on this site when Gouldmark was running for Commissioner. Some on here was going to vote for him because "Democrats are better for the environment" or something like that. I wonder if they still think that way. Also, he was elected by taking advantage of the the land slides and flood on the Chehalis. Basically blaming Sutherland and ignoring the 20" of rain that fell.
And those same democrats will do their best to keep it protected from all of us
Post by: logger on December 31, 2010, 04:40:53 PM
Post by: Special T on December 31, 2010, 05:40:25 PM
Post by: logger on December 31, 2010, 06:46:17 PM
Post by: Jack Diamond on January 01, 2011, 09:38:26 AM
I don't know why you guys are even surprised....he went to Cal Berkeley....
But...but....but.... his political ads when he was running for Congress said that he was an "Okanogan Rancher".... :rolleyes:
:bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash: :bash:
Well he is not the first "Okanogen Rancher" that entered politics, cause they could not manage the Ranch finances, not to mention now 2 acres =ranch! in some people"s mind. So we let them manage our resources and dollars,and stand amazed as they sell us out.
Most votors it would seem go with name recognition, as they won"t bother with research of the candidates, and where does the normal washingtonian get their information? The bought and paid for media. Most of the political candidate"s are running for personal gain , not looking out for the best interest of the people of this state.
So we find out the skunks after it"s too late !
Post by: bearhunter99 on January 01, 2011, 09:41:44 AM
Post by: Jack Diamond on January 01, 2011, 10:16:11 AM
Post by: bigtex on January 01, 2011, 03:20:03 PM
Off topic, but do indians pay the state gas tax or federal for that matter, just wondering .
In no ways am I an expert in this but I believe it has to do with who owns the gas station. Because I know on the Muckleshoot Rez there are two gas stations but one is tribal and the other is not. And the whole different rules thing for tribal governments applies to the tribal station but not the other one.
Post by: logger on January 01, 2011, 07:48:32 PM
Post by: Sporting_Man on January 10, 2011, 11:53:11 AM
Post by: colockumelk on January 10, 2011, 03:36:22 PM
Post by: bearpaw on January 12, 2011, 01:16:20 PM
That's what I've been saying. WE need to get our act together and start challenging stuff like this based on racial discrimination. Nothing in the treaty or the Boldt Decision says that they have a right to this stuff. This is all discriminatory. This is no different than the Jim Crowe laws.
I totally agree.... :bash:
Post by: Humptulips on January 19, 2011, 09:44:36 PM
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1273&year=2011 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1273&year=2011)
HOUSE BILL 1273
_____________________________________________
State of Washington 62nd Legislature 2011 Regular Session
By Representatives Kristiansen, Blake, Orcutt, Chandler, McCune,
Pearson, and Harris
Read first time 01/18/11. Referred to Committee on Agriculture &
Natural Resources.
1 AN ACT Relating to prohibiting public agencies from providing
2 specific segments of the general public with access to land for the
3 purposes of hunting and fishing; adding a new section to chapter 77.12
4 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 43.17 RCW; adding a new section to
5 chapter 79A.05 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 79.10 RCW; adding
6 a new section to chapter 36.32 RCW; adding a new section to chapter
7 35.21 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 35A.21 RCW; and creating a
8 new section.
9 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
10 NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 77.12 RCW
11 to read as follows:
12 Unless otherwise specifically authorized in statute, no public
13 agency, as that term is defined in RCW 42.30.020, may provide only a
14 specified segment or segments of the general public with access to land
15 owned, leased, or otherwise controlled by the public agency for the
16 purpose of hunting or fishing without providing the same access
17 opportunity to the general public. This section applies to rules or
18 regulations of the public agency, access contracts and agreements, and
19 all other forms of express or implied access permission.
p. 1 HB 1273
1 NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. Any public agency, as that term is defined
2 in RCW 42.30.020, that allows a specified segment or segments of the
3 general public to access land owned, leased, or otherwise controlled by
4 the public agency for the purpose of hunting or fishing as of the
5 effective date of this section must either suspend access permission to
6 the specified segment or segments or allow access to the general
7 public.
8 NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. A new section is added to chapter 43.17 RCW
9 to read as follows:
10 Any department listed in RCW 43.17.010 shall comply with section 1
11 of this act when granting access for hunting or fishing to any land
12 owned, leased, or otherwise controlled by the department.
13 NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. A new section is added to chapter 79A.05 RCW
14 to read as follows:
15 The commission shall comply with section 1 of this act when
16 granting access for hunting or fishing to any land owned, leased, or
17 otherwise controlled by the commission for hunting or fishing access.
18 NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. A new section is added to chapter 79.10 RCW
19 under the subchapter heading "Multiple Use" to read as follows:
20 The department shall comply with section 1 of this act when
21 granting access for hunting or fishing to any land owned, leased, or
22 otherwise controlled by the department.
23 NEW SECTION. Sec. 6. A new section is added to chapter 36.32 RCW
24 to read as follows:
25 A county shall comply with section 1 of this act when granting
26 access for hunting or fishing to any land owned, leased, or otherwise
27 controlled by the county.
28 NEW SECTION. Sec. 7. A new section is added to chapter 35.21 RCW
29 to read as follows:
30 A city shall comply with section 1 of this act when granting access
31 for hunting or fishing to any land owned, leased, or otherwise
32 controlled by the city.
HB 1273 p. 2
1 NEW SECTION. Sec. 8. A new section is added to chapter 35A.21 RCW
2 to read as follows:
3 A code city shall comply with section 1 of this act when granting
4 access for hunting or fishing to any land owned, leased, or otherwise
5 controlled by the code city.
--- END ---
p.
Post by: bobcat on January 19, 2011, 10:03:25 PM
So it would seem it does some good to make a little noise. This bill should take care of things if it passes.
Love it! Thanks for posting! :IBCOOL:
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 19, 2011, 10:03:40 PM
Post by: ICEMAN on January 20, 2011, 04:47:28 AM
Post by: whacker1 on January 20, 2011, 06:13:17 AM
So are the tribes considered a "specified segment of the general public"?
I wondered the same thing, but I haven't come up with anything better regarding wording without saying "specified members of sovereign nations inside our own borders"
Post by: bobcat on January 20, 2011, 06:59:31 AM
So are the tribes considered a "specified segment of the general public"?
I don't see how they could say they are not. :dunno:
Post by: Gamblin Guy on January 20, 2011, 07:12:42 AM
Post by: DeerThug on January 29, 2011, 10:34:41 AM
I just got a call from an aid for my Representative Rep Ross. On a Saturday morning no less!!. WE got heard. He said that a few weeks ago all east side legislators started getting a lot of e-mails on this.
Any way there is legislation that has been introduced to stop Goldmark on this. It is HB 1273 . The Hearing is scheduled on this Tuesday at 10 AM in Hearing room C of the John O'Brien Building.
We need to mobilize fast to support this.
Got to run to a basketball game and have more info will post later today.
DeerThug
Post by: ICEMAN on January 29, 2011, 04:51:59 PM
Post by: grundy53 on February 09, 2011, 03:30:24 PM
Dear Mr. Grant:
Thank you for contacting me regarding access to Washington State Department of Natural Resource (DNR) lands behind DNR-managed gates.
DNR manages state-owned trust lands to provide sustainable revenue to schools and other trust beneficiaries, and also to make trust lands available for multiple uses, including recreation that is compatible with trust land management.
DNR has been negatively affected by the economic downturn, and we currently have only eight law enforcement officers to protect three million acres of trust lands from illegal activities such as dumping, vandalism and theft. The unfortunate result is the installation of gates on some DNR-managed forest roads, especially in Puget Sound counties.
I am committed to providing recreational access to the public, even during these difficult times. In order to improve public access without increasing costs, including for law enforcement, I have proposed having discussions with other agencies and governments interested in helping administer vehicle access behind gates. I’m seeking government entities with adequate staffing, authority, and the willingness to take responsibility for policing and enforcing protection on state lands through written agreements.
My goal is to improve the overall level of public access behind gates and, if possible, to reduce the number of gates on DNR-managed forest roads.
I appreciate that access to state lands for recreational opportunities is of great importance to you. Thank you for sharing your concerns.
Sincerely,
Peter Goldmark
Commissioner of Public Lands
Washington State Department of Natural Resources
360-902-1000
cpl@dnr.wa.gov
www.dnr.wa.gov (http://www.dnr.wa.gov)
cc: Craig Partridge, Director of Policy and Government Relations
Clay Sprague, Deputy Supervisor for Uplands
Rodney Cawston, Tribal Relations Manager
#10-727
Post by: 6x6in6 on February 09, 2011, 04:08:29 PM
I am committed to providing recreational access to the public, even during these difficult times. In order to improve public access without increasing costs, including for law enforcement, I have proposed having discussions with other agencies and governments interested in helping administer vehicle access behind gates. I’m seeking government entities with adequate staffing, authority, and the willingness to take responsibility for policing and enforcing protection on state lands through written agreements.
"Other agencies" helping administer vehicle access behind gates.
In other words........
As a thank you for your campaign contribution, if you should feel the need to drive up in the woods and check a gate from time to time, I will gladly issue you all the keys your Tribe needs.
Post by: FC on February 09, 2011, 04:10:26 PM
Post by: Humptulips on February 09, 2011, 08:51:51 PM
So I sent an email to Goldmark 5 weeks ago and he finally got back to me. here is his canned response. He doesn't even mention giving access to the tribes, let alone why.
Dear Mr. Grant:
Thank you for contacting me regarding access to Washington State Department of Natural Resource (DNR) lands behind DNR-managed gates.
DNR manages state-owned trust lands to provide sustainable revenue to schools and other trust beneficiaries, and also to make trust lands available for multiple uses, including recreation that is compatible with trust land management.
DNR has been negatively affected by the economic downturn, and we currently have only eight law enforcement officers to protect three million acres of trust lands from illegal activities such as dumping, vandalism and theft. The unfortunate result is the installation of gates on some DNR-managed forest roads, especially in Puget Sound counties.
I am committed to providing recreational access to the public, even during these difficult times. In order to improve public access without increasing costs, including for law enforcement, I have proposed having discussions with other agencies and governments interested in helping administer vehicle access behind gates. I’m seeking government entities with adequate staffing, authority, and the willingness to take responsibility for policing and enforcing protection on state lands through written agreements.
My goal is to improve the overall level of public access behind gates and, if possible, to reduce the number of gates on DNR-managed forest roads.
I appreciate that access to state lands for recreational opportunities is of great importance to you. Thank you for sharing your concerns.
Sincerely,
Peter Goldmark
Commissioner of Public Lands
Washington State Department of Natural Resources
360-902-1000
cpl@dnr.wa.gov
www.dnr.wa.gov (http://www.dnr.wa.gov)
cc: Craig Partridge, Director of Policy and Government Relations
Clay Sprague, Deputy Supervisor for Uplands
Rodney Cawston, Tribal Relations Manager
#10-727
Spin machine meets copy machine. I received the same letter yesterday.
Post by: grundy53 on February 09, 2011, 09:10:54 PM
Post by: Gobble Gobble on February 10, 2011, 08:52:27 AM
Post by: WOODS on February 18, 2011, 08:25:24 PM
Post by: ICEMAN on February 19, 2011, 06:47:24 AM
Post by: NW Outdoors Radio on February 26, 2011, 09:11:27 AM
I was unaware (but not surprised) to hear about the campaign contributions that may be behind this apparent sweetheart deal.
It's amazing what things you learn on this forum!
John Kruse
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on February 26, 2011, 09:32:44 AM
Post by: whacker1 on March 31, 2011, 10:42:34 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on April 03, 2011, 12:30:58 PM
This is what I am talking about ... I fricken about had it with this *censored* o.k.. Only a handful of sportsmen participate in getting involved with the issues...If the state wants us to keep supporting all there *censored* which never goes in favor to the sportsmen they need to step up and open all state owned lands and provide an easement to access these properties ..They want to charge a $ 30.00 access fee but buy it and stay in your truck...i am sorry but i live to hunt and i dont sit on my ass and do nothing.. I am always on top of the issues this lovely state has to offer...I just spent a week trying to get bill 5356 hound hunting on the next ballot and after all my hard work I have 216 signatures headed to the house for final passing .. If we all got involved we would get some *censored* done...