WDFW 10 Year Recreational Strategy Draft-Should We Be Concerned?

[Old406Kid]

I wasn't aware of this until just now but in reading it it appears that a number of proposals, if enacted, would have an effect on us.
Starting on about pg. 29 there appears to be changes mentioned on the use of undesignated roads and trails along with streamside access.
Unfortunately, the comment period closes at 5 p.m. tomorrow, 2/28.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/02293

This is the link for public input.
https://publicinput.com/10YearRecStrategy

 

[Old406Kid]

TTT

 

[Divad]

Up front, this is the kind of loosely worded agenda that blankets future, unwritten rules. Big yikes.

I like the shorter allowed camping days though.

Can’t remove wood [for burning] kind of good but also doesn’t address cutting of living trees because the state has to settle the logistics of a pass to sell to you. Maybe not a bad idea, barrier to entry for the typical riff.

Many access locations will be shortened as to not impose on private p.

Drones limited **** you bloggers.

But the loosely worded access control I’m sure brings up a bunch of controversy in the future. Can I not bushwhack through forests untouched anymore to find streams w/o ppl? Good luck banning me there

Also, even more pandering to tribal double dipping.

 

[JS]

Commented, WDFW is just the worst

 

[Old406Kid]

Up front, this is the kind of loosely worded agenda that blankets future, unwritten rules. Big yikes.

I like the shorter allowed camping days though.

Can’t remove wood [for burning] kind of good but also doesn’t address cutting of living trees because the state has to settle the logistics of a pass to sell to you. Maybe not a bad idea, barrier to entry for the typical riff.

Many access locations will be shortened as to not impose on private p.

Drones limited **** you bloggers.

But the loosely worded access control I’m sure brings up a bunch of controversy in the future. Can I not bushwhack through forests untouched anymore to find streams w/o ppl? Good luck banning me there

Also, even more pandering to tribal double dipping.

I agree with the shortened camping days as the changes in free time since Covid have really increased the usage.

Cutting living trees should never be but there's always the dimwit that thinks he can get green wood to burn.

Drones with permits...might be necessary because there always seems to be the obnoxious guy that fails to realize that he's obnoxious.

The unestablished/undesignated road and trail proposals are of greatest concern to me. I don't hunt anymore but that wouldn't be realistic for most hunting.

 

[Billy]

We should be concerned. Our department is more concerned with wordy 10 and 25 year plans that do nothing but restrict public access then figuring out actual problems like the Blue Mountain elk herd being at a 25 year low...

 

[Old406Kid]

We should be concerned. Our department is more concerned with wordy 10 and 25 year plans that do nothing but restrict public access then figuring out actual problems like the Blue Mountain elk herd being at a 25 year low...

It seems like we pay the license fees yet end up on the short end of the stick to those that don't contribute much if anything to the WDFW coffers.

 

[Tom Butler]

I threw in my 2 cents worth.

 

[Rob Allen]

More rules about how I can use my land???

BS to the max..

Here is a new rule... WDFW is forbidden to restrict access to the public land under its stewardship. Nothing wrong with camping for 14 days.

 

[Old406Kid]

Nothing wrong with camping for 14 days.

If it's enforced.
Unfortunately, some people set up and squat for the entire season.

 

[ThatGuyRyRy]

I wasn't aware of this until just now but in reading it it appears that a number of proposals, if enacted, would have an effect on us.
Starting on about pg. 29 there appears to be changes mentioned on the use of undesignated roads and trails along with streamside access.
Unfortunately, the comment period closes at 5 p.m. tomorrow, 2/28.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/02293

This is the link for public input.
https://publicinput.com/10YearRecStrategy

The concern of undesignated roads next to streams is due to efforts by the agency to control roadway erosion and eliminate siltation happening in those streams. Even forest roads have permits that have to be issued and erosion control measures put in place that the agency has to maintain and keep track of.

 

[Old406Kid]

The concern of undesignated roads next to streams is due to efforts by the agency to control roadway erosion and eliminate siltation happening in those streams. Even forest roads have permits that have to be issued and erosion control measures put in place that the agency has to maintain and keep track of.

I understand that but it seems to have a much broader scope.
Also, I probably live on the wrong side of the state to see the impacts in more densely populated areas.

 

[Dustin Chromers]

The concern of undesignated roads next to streams is due to efforts by the agency to control roadway erosion and eliminate siltation happening in those streams. Even forest roads have permits that have to be issued and erosion control measures put in place that the agency has to maintain and keep track of.

The most efficient way to decommission a road and pretend it doesn't exist. The cheapest as well. I'm tired of losing access. Let me repeat that. I'm tired of losing access. A road is and should be treated like a permanent fixture on the land with a multitude of effects far into the future. The forest service can't even just let them decay naturally. Not that they should but it seems it's all about getting people out of there first. Of course the hikers love it because they can have their little "wild" experience within eyesight of Seattle. Me I'd rather have that further up the hill. The limiting of access is further exploited by the demographic who favours closed areas by concentrating use in smaller areas and then pointing out what a shit show this or that use group is. And it does look bad. It works to keep me out.

I'm beyond concerned with the direction the wdfw is taking. It would be fantastic if they would go back to fish and game management policy. It's almost like they think they are a different agency with a different set of duties. They need a redirect.

 

[Rob Allen]

If it's enforced.
Unfortunately, some people set up and squat for the entire season.

I have no problem with that.. it's their land.

 

[Salmo_g]

It's almost like they think they are a different agency with a different set of duties. They need a redirect.

And there you have it. Susewind sees that the days of fish and wildlife agencies catering to the hook and bullet fraternity have waned. I think his vision of WDFW's future is as a land management agency managing a "petting zoo" where fish and wildlife are looked at but not harvested. Unless you're a treaty tribe, of course.

 

[Rob Allen]

And there you have it. Susewind sees that the days of fish and wildlife agencies catering to the hook and bullet fraternity have waned. I think his vision of WDFW's future is as a land management agency managing a "petting zoo" where fish and wildlife are looked at but not harvested. Unless you're a treaty tribe, of course.

If only it were just WDFW. If only it was just Washington state government.
People's agendas should never take precedent over basic rights of other people to be free. Yes hunting and fishing and recreational use of public land is a requirement for freedom to exist.

 

[Tom Butler]

Still time, be heard.
I was tired as I had the grandkids all weekend, but here is what I said yesterday:
Thomas Butler "I'm all for road standards, but the document seems to read as a precurser to "we're closing this area because we can't maintain a road to a certain standard". The limiting of access such as walking old logging roads or stream access by game trail seems to be along the same lines. I hope that all these proposals are made with the intent of protecting the environment while at the same time providing the same amount or more access for the increasing population and use. Raising a family to enjoy an active outdoor lifestyle is far better in my opinion than closing things and have kids playing video games."

 

[Paige]

I have no problem with that.. it's their land.

I do have a problem with it, because they tend to be homeless vagabonds that dont give a rats ass. They destroy the surrounding area with trash, needles, human refuse, dumped cars and boats and half the time leave the rotten RV that limped there.

 

[Rob Allen]

I do have a problem with it, because they tend to be homeless vagabonds that dont give a rats ass. They destroy the surrounding area with trash, needles, human refuse, dumped cars and boats and half the time leave the rotten RV that limped there.

I have never seen that on WDFW property . Seen lots of it on city property close to begging and stealing grounds.

 

[Brian in OR.]