Post by: Dave Workman on November 24, 2011, 10:12:34 AM
Whether the threat was ever as real as many gun rights activists feared, a draft plan put forth by the Bureau if Land Management that called for curtailed recreational shooting on public lands was officially derailed Wednesday by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.
http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/high-profile-reversal-on-public-lands-shooting
:IBCOOL: :tup:
Post by: Bigshooter on November 24, 2011, 10:22:11 AM
Post by: KillBilly on November 24, 2011, 12:02:53 PM
Post by: bigtex on November 24, 2011, 01:32:04 PM
BLM only owns about 430k acres in WA, all but about 1k is in Eastern WA.
Post by: dawei on November 24, 2011, 01:35:45 PM
Post by: high country on November 24, 2011, 02:13:04 PM
This does not affect the current BLM target shooting closure at their Fishtrap Lake Rec Area in Lincoln County. That closure is still in place.
BLM only owns about 430k acres in WA, all but about 1k is in Eastern WA.
Any reason why fishtrap is excluded?
Post by: bigtex on November 24, 2011, 02:27:08 PM
This does not affect the current BLM target shooting closure at their Fishtrap Lake Rec Area in Lincoln County. That closure is still in place.
BLM only owns about 430k acres in WA, all but about 1k is in Eastern WA.
Any reason why fishtrap is excluded?
The potential rule change Workman is talking about what have essentially made target shooting illegal on any BLM lands. It is a different regulation then those that are already in law (such as Fishtrap). So Fishtrap was not excluded, the "new" law would have essentially covered all lands. BLM and other federal agencies will continue to close certain areas to target shooting due to public safety or dumping issues, there will just not be a blanket nationwide "no shooting" on BLM lands.
Post by: high country on November 24, 2011, 02:36:40 PM
Post by: bigtex on November 24, 2011, 02:46:33 PM
Thanks. I am gonna have to have weatherman get on getting that reopened. He loves land use suits.
Well USFS closed the I-90 and Middle Fork Snoqualmie corridors to target shooting about two years ago in King County due to public safety issues and target shooting littering. They also just recently closed another area for the construction of a new trail.
This BLM at Fishtrap closure has been in effect for over a year.
I personally have no problem closing areas to shooting due to littering of shells/casings and metal "targets" like TV's or public safety issues. However a blanket closure on all lands I don't believe in. And from what I have seen, the I-90 corridor, Middle Fork Snoq and Fishtrap areas did have high amounts of target shooting related dumping, and there were several public safety incidents regarding shooting.
Post by: high country on November 24, 2011, 08:34:46 PM
Post by: bigtex on November 24, 2011, 10:11:18 PM
If you guys would punish the shatbags doing it instead of all of us it would not be an issue. Wdfw can spend hours watching a fake deer, why not a known dumping ground? I would volunteer my master hunter hours to catching the pricks that got it shut down. It is crap to screw everyone for the deed of a few.
WDFW and other agencies do investigate dumping and do "stake out" known dumping areas. There was a story in the Kitsap newspaper about 4 DNR Officers conducting a similar operation in the Tahuya State Forest this summer.
People need to understand that when it comes to littering, WDFW is not the "lead" agency. Each land management agency (WDFW, DNR, BLM, USFS, USFWS, NPS) has their own law enforcement personnel responsible for the detecting crimes on their lands. County sheriffs are typically the lead agency for littering/dumping, unless one of the agencies above basically steps in and says they will take the case and it is on their lands. Since we are talking about BLM (which is mainly a eastern WA agency) and Fishtrap I will talk about law enforcement in eastern washington.
Here is the problem, there are 2 DNR Officers responsible for all DNR land in eastern WA. There are 2 BLM LE Rangers responsible for all BLM land in Washington. On average there is less then one USFS Law Enforcement Officer per USFS ranger district in the state of Washington. USFWS has about 4 field officers responsible for USFWS Wildlife Refuges in eastern WA, these officers also cover one refuge in northern Idaho. NPS has about 5 full time LE Rangers responsible for NPS lands at Lake Roosevelt. And finally you have WDFW who not only has to patrol WDFW lands for violations, but also cooperating agency lands, as well patrol all other lands for other resource violations (fishing, hunting, habitat, forest resources, ORV, snowmobile, etc). Then you add in the fact most county SO's are so underfunded and shortstaffed that they are no longer even responding to break-in's and other non-violent responses.
My point? There is simply not enough manpower to go around. There have been WDFW ran operations on WDFW lands for people violating littering/dumping laws such as failing to retrieve shell casings, and they are typically very successful. But you need to remember that WDFW has so many other enforcement activities they need to manage as well. And once again, WDFW is not the "lead" agency when it comes to dumping/littering on public lands.
Post by: Special T on November 24, 2011, 10:24:35 PM
I always hate it when they close down some old gravel pit to shooting because generally they are a much safer place to shoot and or site in a rifle than just out in the woods.
Would it be so hard to set up a self serve shooting range? I used one in AR that was an old gravel pit. It had markers for yardage out to 200 yrds, shooting benches and back
stops. The place was not filled with garbage was on NFS land (I think) and it was a pleasure to re-sight in my Muzzle loader in for deer there. If they confine the shoot-able
area then isn't it easier to police and keep up? All the bunny huggers make it so difficult to put in new gun ranges, and always bitch about the existing ones... :bash:
Post by: high country on November 25, 2011, 06:34:13 AM
Post by: ICEMAN on November 25, 2011, 08:35:37 AM
My big problem is this.. If you are going to ban/lock up most of the land available for shooting then you need to open some areas to it.
I always hate it when they close down some old gravel pit to shooting because generally they are a much safer place to shoot and or site in a rifle than just out in the woods.
Would it be so hard to set up a self serve shooting range? I used one in AR that was an old gravel pit. It had markers for yardage out to 200 yrds, shooting benches and back
stops. The place was not filled with garbage was on NFS land (I think) and it was a pleasure to re-sight in my Muzzle loader in for deer there. If they confine the shoot-able
area then isn't it easier to police and keep up? All the bunny huggers make it so difficult to put in new gun ranges, and always bitch about the existing ones... :bash:
Totally agree with you here.
The state continues to spend and spend and spend on trail maintenance, parking lot and restrooms for motorcycle and horse enthusiasts yet will not spend a dime on anything for a different sport; Target shooting.
I know of no state funded pistol or rifle range. Does anyone know of any? :dunno:
Post by: CedarPants on November 25, 2011, 09:15:33 AM
My question, maybe you can help here Bigtex .... so .... there isn't enough manpower to go around. I get that. That is why there are these dumping issues in the first place. So, when they say "no more shooting", do these agencies suddenly start focusing on these "closed" areas NOW instead of when they should have BEFORE? Seems anyone and everyone has free reign to go do whatever they want in unpatrolled areas ... but once the area becomes "closed", do they then become patrolled?
Not sure how it works and was just wondering. It would seem a backwards way of land management if that is the case
Post by: high country on November 25, 2011, 09:27:47 AM
Post by: bobcat on November 25, 2011, 10:00:19 AM
I know of no state funded pistol or rifle range. Does anyone know of any? :dunno:
Well, there is the "triangle gravel pit" in Capitol Forest. I did a Google search and found that it even has its own Facebook page:
http://en-gb.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.191444170218.165068.130158330218&type=1
Post by: ICEMAN on November 25, 2011, 10:01:59 AM
Post by: bobcat on November 25, 2011, 10:04:01 AM
What improvements have been made there which benefit target shooters at taxpayer expense?
Nothing I know of. But just the fact that they are leaving it open is something. There's got to be some sort of cost associated with allowing all the shooting to go on there, although a lot of the clean up is done by volunteers.
Post by: bigtex on November 25, 2011, 10:47:00 AM
My big problem is this.. If you are going to ban/lock up most of the land available for shooting then you need to open some areas to it.
I always hate it when they close down some old gravel pit to shooting because generally they are a much safer place to shoot and or site in a rifle than just out in the woods.
Would it be so hard to set up a self serve shooting range? I used one in AR that was an old gravel pit. It had markers for yardage out to 200 yrds, shooting benches and back
stops. The place was not filled with garbage was on NFS land (I think) and it was a pleasure to re-sight in my Muzzle loader in for deer there. If they confine the shoot-able
area then isn't it easier to police and keep up? All the bunny huggers make it so difficult to put in new gun ranges, and always bitch about the existing ones... :bash:
Totally agree with you here.
The state continues to spend and spend and spend on trail maintenance, parking lot and restrooms for motorcycle and horse enthusiasts yet will not spend a dime on anything for a different sport; Target shooting.
I know of no state funded pistol or rifle range. Does anyone know of any? :dunno:
The state does provide about 500K every biennium to improve firearm and archery ranges. http://www.rco.wa.gov/grants/farr.shtml Ranges must apply for this grant.
Assuming when you say "state" for things like trail maintenance, lots, restrooms you are saying DNR. Once again, there are two state grants which agencies (such as DNR and USFS) apply for to use for the projects you listed. http://www.rco.wa.gov/grants/nova.shtml
http://www.rco.wa.gov/grants/rtp.shtml
Much of DNR's recreation program (trails, ATV, etc) is actually grant funded and not general fund based. The reason why DNR "suffered" so much loss in the past couple years is they lost general fund $, but also those grants did not give out any money. The 2011 fiscal year is the first year the grants have been back for a couple years.
Post by: bigtex on November 25, 2011, 11:00:29 AM
My question, maybe you can help here Bigtex .... so .... there isn't enough manpower to go around. I get that. That is why there are these dumping issues in the first place. So, when they say "no more shooting", do these agencies suddenly start focusing on these "closed" areas NOW instead of when they should have BEFORE? Seems anyone and everyone has free reign to go do whatever they want in unpatrolled areas ... but once the area becomes "closed", do they then become patrolled?
Agencies can start focusing on those areas that have some type of closure in place. Unfortunately like many of us know, the number of people to patrol is still low. So what these "new" regs do is actually toughen the penalties. For example lets say you go out to DNR/WDFW lands, shoot some targets and leave your brass. On DNR and WDFW lands the fine for that violation is a $87 infraction. Now lets say there was some type of "No Dumping" rule/sign in place there, typically these "closures" carry tougher penalties. For example, areas that has "No Dumping" signs put up by the county carry a tougher penalty then if somebody just want to some dead end road and dumped some garbage.
Post by: bigtex on November 25, 2011, 11:04:54 AM
I have serious issue with the way our public land is managed. The issue of not having enough manpower to police the ground is ludicrous. If you use that logic Nevada, Wyoming, Montana....etc. should shut down many of its highways because they can't police them. If the blm would increase the fine to include possible seizure of vehicle and weapons....I bet you would see a huge decrease in litter.
People in those states know that if they are in certain rural areas then response time can be limited. I am friends with a former Montana State Trooper; it would take him three hours at times to respond to calls because of the distance.
BLM and other agencies do NOT determine penalties. Penalties/fines are made by the courts. At the federal level each federal court district makes their penalties, this is why the penalties for federal violations are different in western and eastern WA (two different courts). At the state level the Supreme Court sets the fines.
Post by: high country on November 25, 2011, 12:19:27 PM
Post by: Special T on November 25, 2011, 05:32:06 PM
My big problem is this.. If you are going to ban/lock up most of the land available for shooting then you need to open some areas to it.
I always hate it when they close down some old gravel pit to shooting because generally they are a much safer place to shoot and or site in a rifle than just out in the woods.
Would it be so hard to set up a self serve shooting range? I used one in AR that was an old gravel pit. It had markers for yardage out to 200 yrds, shooting benches and back
stops. The place was not filled with garbage was on NFS land (I think) and it was a pleasure to re-sight in my Muzzle loader in for deer there. If they confine the shoot-able
area then isn't it easier to police and keep up? All the bunny huggers make it so difficult to put in new gun ranges, and always bitch about the existing ones... :bash:
Totally agree with you here.
The state continues to spend and spend and spend on trail maintenance, parking lot and restrooms for motorcycle and horse enthusiasts yet will not spend a dime on anything for a different sport; Target shooting.
I know of no state funded pistol or rifle range. Does anyone know of any? :dunno:
There actually is a fund... When you get you Concealed carry permit $5 goes into a fund for shooting ranges. ANY non profit can apply for the grant $$$ I know this because our Archery club
Silver Arrow Bowmen got our grant approved. ANY non profit organization can get funds for various projects. THERE IS TONS OF $$$!!! part of the reason there is is because the $
goes mostly for saftly improvements, but other things can be paid for as well. Grants require lots of work learning the process and doing the paperwork. I think the real problem is the NIMBY
issues. Skagit County has been trying to put in a gun range on Lake Cavanaugh RD for like 10 years! All the Freaking Seattleites put up a fight. old gun clubs and ranges have to keep vigilant
against the constant complaints, and the ability to make new ranges is NIL! It sucks but that is the way it is.