A friend told me that HB 2528 changes hunters as to the Discover Pass bit. Seems you loose it built in the hunting license ( OK yet in fishing ) so you have to buy the pass for hunting with state lands. Not being really up on this anyone tracked this out? Seems it is to be in the HB 2528 language someplace but it went to committee but from what I got it sounds like a screwing for the hunters and that means fishers are next.

I will try and look it up later but am rushed now but I thought I should get the Red Flag out hopefully someone has the full storey.

Edited the tittle rather than add a new thread. The update is on down the thread.

The bill was introduced as a "title" only bill. 2528

We have similar friends, and I received a phone call as well today.

The gist of what is supposed to be introduced at the meeting on Thursday, based on my understanding, is somewhat more palatable than the current Discover Pass.

What was explained to me was that hunters will get a discount on the Discover Pass with the purchase of a hunting license. That will be approximately $15. There will still be a transaction fee involved, but at least hunters who pony upwards of $300 or more in license fees within their family will get some recognition to what they are paying into the state.

I will believe it when I see it, but I think I can support this. I realize that I have an impact on the resources that I use. I know that there is a cost to the upkeep involved. I know that I need to pay for that in some way.

Some folks may parse this out and say yeah, but your license fees only go towards wildlife and enforcement. I see it as paying the State. I don't really care which account it drops into. They can always change the law, etc, at a later date and direct the funds where they want them to go anyway.

I'm happy to see these changes being proposed, but then again, I'll reserve my final judgement until I see it in writing.

Hopefully I won't have to mount another "sisyphean task" to get my point across this time. (I had to look that word up Dave.) If CCA supports this, I might even have to amend my tag line below. Who knows, maybe Marsha will un-unfriend me on Facebook.

The heartburn I have with the whole Discovery Pass crap is the Prime Beneficiary is the State Parks Department. And that was because of ineptitude in that $7 million plus fiasco in Port Townsend. It seems that the State Parks Idiot in charge was and is still not held accountable, i.e., demoted/transferred/whatever bad for screwing up big time. Now they want us to Pay a LOT MORE just because the management or what passes for management of State Parks is inept???? I say no matter how justified the "Perceived Need For More TAX Money" is stated, it should be NO until the inept personnel problems of State Parks is thoroughly cleaned out.

Just read an article that echoes your opening statement...I knew the state parks got a big cut but I didn't know they got 84%! DNR and WDFW only get 8% each. I look around the Peninsula here and I see that the vast majority of recreational activities taking place on state land are occuring on DNR and WDFW managed lands. I would love to see those percentages change with increased funding towards DNR and WDFW. It seems to me that those agencies offer more to the average hunter or fisherman but maybe I'm only seeing a small slice of the big picture.

The whole idea is stupid.....stupid.....stupid.
Why is it desireable to have another fee that is portioned out?
If you want more money, raise license fees....raise camping fees.....raise entry fees. That way the right department gets it's appropriate share.
WTF use is a discover pass?

Slab, it is just as honest and straight forward a fee as has been the $5.00 charged to you on each year's vehicle renewal unless you happen to be aware of it and opt out. As brought to you in both cases by your friendly Legislature!

It appears the pass did not work out so hot!! Like 24 million of oh oh.


By Krista Norsworthy

Staff Writer/ Washington State Wire



OLYMPIA, Jan. 27. – The state’s much-touted Discover Pass program is shaping up as a $24 million flop, a House panel was told Thursday. That’s how much parks officials say the state will run short – and they’re being optimistic when they say it.

Lawmakers launched the pass program to make up for the $64 million they whacked from state parks and other recreational lands programs last year in the current two-year state budget. Motorists who stop are required to display either the $30 annual pass or a $10 day pass, on pain of a $99 ticket.

But now that the sales figures are finally in for the first six months, it seems clear the state has a dud on its hands. Sales have been dismal, at least measured against the state’s expectations.

By the end of December, officials had hoped to raise $19.4 million for the three state agencies that get the money, the bulk of it for the state parks. Instead, the pass program had raised $8.2 million. That’s a whopping $11.2 million shortfall already, just a quarter of the way through the two-year budget cycle. State officials are projecting a $24 million shortfall by the time the biennium ends June 30, 2013.

The dismal news was delivered to the House Government Appropriations and Oversight Committee Thursday as it considered a series of bills aimed to make the program more appealing. Most of them shoot for the same target – increasing the number of cars that might be allowed under a single pass.

Advocates for the state parks system say it’s a start, but it’s going to take more than that.

“Parks are in a terminal crisis,” said Peter Reed, chairman of the Washington State Parks Foundation, as he offered an endorsement of one House proposal. “Costs are bleeding out the door at the moment, and it’s important to move House Bill 2153 forward because it has a chance to create revenue.”



Dismal Projection is Optimistic



That shortfall projection actually could be much worse. Right now the state is 58 percent off the mark, and if sales continue at the same anemic rate, the state would be a whopping $38 million short in 2013.

But Virigina Painter, spokeswoman for the state Parks and Recreation Commission, said the agencies think things might pick up in the next few months as the public becomes accustomed to the pass. So they’re figuring on an ultimate shortfall of around 30 percent.

The way the money is divvied, parks gets 84 percent of the money and the departments of Natural Resources and Fish and Wildlife split the rest. By itself, Parks and Recreation Commission revenue is down $13 million so far this biennium. Already it has begun announcing layoffs.



Search for Blame



State officials, parks advocates and lawmakers are scratching their heads and trying to figure out what went wrong. The most popular scapegoat appears to be the transferability problem. Right now the pass can only be used in a single vehicle, and families that own more than one car must buy more than one pass.

A November survey conducted by Washington State University under the direction of the three agencies indicated lack of transferability was a major reason for public dissatisfaction. And there are plenty of approaches. HB 2153, sponsored by state Rep. Zack Hudgins, D-Tukwila, and Senate Bill 5977, sponsored by Sen. Kevin Ranker, each would allow a purchaser to write a second license number on his or her pass. Other proposals would allow the same pass to be used by all vehicles registered to a single address.

But those aren’t the only guesses. Some say the pass was put on the market too quickly. Some say the rules are confusing. Parks officials maintain public awareness was low, and they chalk it up to a marketing problem.

“It’s a challenge to reach people,” said Steve Milner of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission.

But State Rep. Chris Hurst, D-Enumclaw said there is plenty about the program that has just rubbed people the wrong way. Parks users were furious when they discovered they had to pay $5 vendor fees on top of pass costs, he said. It is especially nettlesome for those who purchase online – Internet sales actually save the state money. “It’s such a convenience to sell these things over the Internet,” Hurst said. “It really made people angry.”

In all, five Discover Pass bills are being considered by the House committee. Among other things, they would eliminate vendor fees, requiring the program to absorb the cost. Others would offer a 50 percent discount on passes when purchased in conjunction with campsites or certain hunting and fishing permits. One would allow people to park their cars and use an off-road vehicle without buying a second pass.

And then there’s a proposal that might be considered a blank slate, with the details to be filled in later. House Bill 2528 is a “title only” bill, stating merely that it is “relating to the Discover Pass” – a measure that would give lawmakers the chance to write something entirely new late in the session.



Bigger Say



Some user groups the passes might be an easier sell if purchasers could decide where the money goes.

Jim Putman of the Pacific Northwest Four-Wheel Drive Association is a supporter of HB 2153, but says he’d rather give his money to DNR.

“As 4-wheel-drive users we use the Department of Natural Resources land, and quite honestly felt we got the short end of the stick in the whole pass idea,” Putman said.

As parks advocates grimly look toward 2013, when more cuts are in the offing, they say success of the program is more critical than ever. Linda Gough, president of Preserve Our Parks, said it may keep the program alive.
“We don’t necessarily give the public the full disclosure of what’s going to happen if they don’t buy a Discover Pass,” Gough said. “If you don’t buy a Discover Pass, the state parks can close. I don’t think people know that.”

Or throw Grandma under the bus!

Another Edsel. No matter how you change the chrome it is still an Edsel.

(And if you don't know about Edsels I am sure you have a 4G super whiz bang computer/phone....so look it up!)

Hate to say it but there is no thing as a "profitable" park..

HAHAHAH!!!! Now that right there is FUNNY!

Thanks for the laugh AM.

JFC, who could have looked into the future and seen this debacle. Drowning in debt so you throw together a package with numbers taken form a psychic, duck taped together by some less than astute public servants and shoved at us like gruel at some boys home, expecting us to be grateful that we have it.
Now I hear there are proposals to make it transferable, (no-brainer) also to dedicate those funds to whatever cause the buyer deems worthy, (never going to happen) and to offer a discount to hunters and fishers if they buy it at the time they purchase their licenses, among others.

I'll bet we could put some grade school kids in charge and they would come up with a scenario that was at least this good.

Our tax dollars at work.

Fishy

The Legislature might, just might, consider doing a better survey of the public. They might find things like:
1. visiting parks and other discover pass locations is discretionary, and people are voting with their pocketbooks;
2. that citizens feel state parks should continue to be funded through the general fund. (i.e., how much of the state's 7.8% sales tax revenue would be necessary to fully fund state parks? And how does that jive against citizen's - as opposed to Legislator's - priorities in the state budget?);
3. lack of vehicle transferability should have been a no-brainer if only they had noticed the precedent set by the WDFW parking pass, but still, it isn't the main reason;
4. the $5 hit for online sales is so stupid only organized crime would have thought of it;
5. the last time they tried parking passes for state parks that were much cheaper, the citizens voted by refusing to buy them;
6. it's probably startling to realize, but citizens actually have the final say.

Sg

and I still see no accountibility, i.e., adverse personnel actions at State Parks for that Septic System Fiasco ($7 Million plus). Nope, no more mega bucks until accountibility.

Transverability & reduction in price per what an wdfg replacement pass used to cost, and loose the 5 dollar admin fee MIGHT have got me to purchase one, but so far I have purposely not had any reason to pay either DNR or STATE PARKS. There are places I used to go occasionaly that I will no longer frequent. Guess its time to get my VA disability which I very likley would qualify for.

I hear you brother. Might be doing the same in the not so distant future.

O.K. I should have said " No such thing as a profitable State park"..

I was ready to buy a Discover Pass last year until I read the restrictions to one vehicle to permit and the online registration fee.

I believe in user fees but in this case our legislative representatives missed the mark.

Had I realized what the bill was destined to be,I would have been contacting my Legislative Reps.

I will do so now, and hopefully common sense will give us better legislation.

If I only use 8% or 16% of the distribution......why should I pay for the other 84%?

Pretty simple for me. Discover Pass ...... Kiss My Azz

Ditto!!!!

What are the dates that this thing is valid? Is it a year from date of purchase?

Or is it seasonal, like a fishing license?