Hi all,
We had 10 of us from Whatcom Trails Co-Op and WHIMPS Mountain Bike Coalition go down to the Sustainable Rec meeting on Wednesday in Burlington. The room was completely full and Mark Mauren commented that it had more than the previous 3 locations combined at least 40+ citizens and then the 5 or so DNR staff. The user mix was pretty diverse too with ORV, Moto, 4x4, Mt. bike, hikers, equestrians and even a trail runner in the mix. Below are my notes/perceptions of the meeting.
The meeting primarily covered the recreation workgroups recommendations. Because there were no members from the workgroup there, Mark and Robert Dingle provided their perceptions of the work groups rationale on each topic. You can read those recommendations here:
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_rec_srwg_preliminary_recommendations_09-28-09.pdf
Two major themes:
1. Funding This seems to be the big issue as DNR is broke. First and foremost, the NOVA funding that was temporarily moved for this biennium in order to keep the state parks open is essentially unconstitutional as these funds were put in place using 1% of gas tax to provide funding for recreation on DNR land back in 1972. That money was taken in order to keep the state parks open due to the huge deficit in the states budget. Without these funds, the DNR really cant support the pre-existing levels of recreation, let alone add more opportunities. The recommendations mostly covered additional funding ideas.
a. FYI three major areas are going to receive the bulk of the funding for the next biennium Reiter, Taneum and Yacult as theyve been in the planning process for years and are essentially ready to go.
2. Recreational Immunity Law in Washington (RCW 4.24.210) All states have these types of laws, but our state has a particular phrase that scares the bajeesus out of landowners (both public and private). That phase is known dangerous, artificial, latent condition. In context with the rest of the law, it essentially means if a landowner knowingly leaves something that matches that phrase on their land (without warning signs .which brings up other liability issues), then they are potentially responsible for an injury. This affects not only lands where we recreate, but also access to those lands (example: passing through private land to access DNR land).
IMPORTANT TO DOs:
1. Please fill out this survey by 5PM on Monday October 12th and give your feedback on the recommendations above.
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=dD7C8prY9GYi5NWvowvRjg_3d_3d
2. Contact your legislator and let them know you want to remove that particular phrase from the Recreational Immunity Law. FYI, the trail lawyers and their lobby will likely scream bloody murder as this removes a potential clientele from them, so we need to become the squeaky wheel on this topic. Dont expect to get this changed overnight, so we need to keep the heat on them. To find your legislator, go here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/districtfinder/default.aspx
Unauthorized trails DNR knows that the various user groups recreate using unauthorized trails on their land. They plan to address them short term on a case-by-case basis and long-term with strategic planning. You can read more about that here: http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_rec_srwg_unauthorized_trails_information092809.pdf
Lastly, another takeaway was a realization amongst the groups that A. although we access them differently, we all like to recreate outdoors and B. we are better off being united in regards to getting what we want. Mark brought up the Reiter planning group as another good example of this. 4x4s acting alone dont have as much power as uniting with the bikers, hikers and equestrians. I could see a collaboration amongst the various groups in Skagit/Whatcom counties in the future.
Cheers,
EB
We had 10 of us from Whatcom Trails Co-Op and WHIMPS Mountain Bike Coalition go down to the Sustainable Rec meeting on Wednesday in Burlington. The room was completely full and Mark Mauren commented that it had more than the previous 3 locations combined at least 40+ citizens and then the 5 or so DNR staff. The user mix was pretty diverse too with ORV, Moto, 4x4, Mt. bike, hikers, equestrians and even a trail runner in the mix. Below are my notes/perceptions of the meeting.
The meeting primarily covered the recreation workgroups recommendations. Because there were no members from the workgroup there, Mark and Robert Dingle provided their perceptions of the work groups rationale on each topic. You can read those recommendations here:
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_rec_srwg_preliminary_recommendations_09-28-09.pdf
Two major themes:
1. Funding This seems to be the big issue as DNR is broke. First and foremost, the NOVA funding that was temporarily moved for this biennium in order to keep the state parks open is essentially unconstitutional as these funds were put in place using 1% of gas tax to provide funding for recreation on DNR land back in 1972. That money was taken in order to keep the state parks open due to the huge deficit in the states budget. Without these funds, the DNR really cant support the pre-existing levels of recreation, let alone add more opportunities. The recommendations mostly covered additional funding ideas.
a. FYI three major areas are going to receive the bulk of the funding for the next biennium Reiter, Taneum and Yacult as theyve been in the planning process for years and are essentially ready to go.
2. Recreational Immunity Law in Washington (RCW 4.24.210) All states have these types of laws, but our state has a particular phrase that scares the bajeesus out of landowners (both public and private). That phase is known dangerous, artificial, latent condition. In context with the rest of the law, it essentially means if a landowner knowingly leaves something that matches that phrase on their land (without warning signs .which brings up other liability issues), then they are potentially responsible for an injury. This affects not only lands where we recreate, but also access to those lands (example: passing through private land to access DNR land).
IMPORTANT TO DOs:
1. Please fill out this survey by 5PM on Monday October 12th and give your feedback on the recommendations above.
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=dD7C8prY9GYi5NWvowvRjg_3d_3d
2. Contact your legislator and let them know you want to remove that particular phrase from the Recreational Immunity Law. FYI, the trail lawyers and their lobby will likely scream bloody murder as this removes a potential clientele from them, so we need to become the squeaky wheel on this topic. Dont expect to get this changed overnight, so we need to keep the heat on them. To find your legislator, go here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/districtfinder/default.aspx
Unauthorized trails DNR knows that the various user groups recreate using unauthorized trails on their land. They plan to address them short term on a case-by-case basis and long-term with strategic planning. You can read more about that here: http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/amp_rec_srwg_unauthorized_trails_information092809.pdf
Lastly, another takeaway was a realization amongst the groups that A. although we access them differently, we all like to recreate outdoors and B. we are better off being united in regards to getting what we want. Mark brought up the Reiter planning group as another good example of this. 4x4s acting alone dont have as much power as uniting with the bikers, hikers and equestrians. I could see a collaboration amongst the various groups in Skagit/Whatcom counties in the future.
Cheers,
EB
