WA State Parks on the chopping block?

[+B+L]

From a staff paper presented to the WA Parks and Recreation Commission yesterday, here is a list of state parks that could potentially be closed (mothballed or abandoned). The parks are listed in order of annual visitors (35,860-715,203).

 

PS Jarrell Cove

EA  Fields Spring

PS  Federation Forest

EA  Sacajawea

SW Rainbow Falls

SW Beacon Rock

SW Lewis & Clark

SW Fort Columbia

EA Alta Lake

EA Columbia Plateau Trail

NW Wallace Falls

PS Lake Easton

EA Yakima Sportsman

EA Maryhill

PS Illahee

PS Dash Point

SW Potlatch

SW Twin Harbors

EA Ginkgo/Wanapum

PS Flaming Geyser

NW Peace Arch

PS Saltwater

SW Ocean City

NW Fort Ebey

EA Wenatchee Confluence

EA Lake Wenatchee

NW Fort Flagler

EA Mount Spokane

SW Millersylvania Memorial

EA Sun Lakes - Dry Falls

NW Larrabee

NW Fort Casey

PS Saint Edward

 

There is an additional list of 13 candidates for transfer to other jurisdictions. Nothing is decided yet, but the proposed budget cuts $23 million from the parks budget and some of the cuts will come from the "park level". More information here (not yet up to date).

[+GrnXnham]

So if they were "mothballed or abandoned" does this mean that we would lose access to them or does that mean that only the facilities within the park (restrooms, picnic tables, road maintenance) wouldn't be there any more?

 

Are they going to erect heavy gates and barbed wire to keep people out? What's to keep people from still using the land for activities such as geocaching?

[+B+L]

So if they were "mothballed or abandoned" does this mean that we would lose access to them or does that mean that only the facilities within the park (restrooms, picnic tables, road maintenance) wouldn't be there any more?

 

Are they going to erect heavy gates and barbed wire to keep people out? What's to keep people from still using the land for activities such as geocaching?

 

It's too soon to tell what will happen. Some parks are certainly going to be closed, temporarily or permanently. Permits are required for caches in state parks, so they already know were they all are, but it is not clear if caches will allowed to stay in place in a closed park and what kind a access will be allowed, if any. Tickets and fines are a risk for those who find closed signs to be inadequate barriers to entry.

 

I'm not going to get all political. I merely raised this issue for informational purposes since many, if not all of the parks in question have caches in them. There is an email address where comments are being accepted at the link I posted, above.

[+Dgwphotos]

I know that there was already a list of sites that were potentially to be closed that was distributed to the media, but this looks like it's a lot more.

[+hydnsek]

So if they were "mothballed or abandoned" does this mean that we would lose access to them or does that mean that only the facilities within the park (restrooms, picnic tables, road maintenance) wouldn't be there any more?

 

Are they going to erect heavy gates and barbed wire to keep people out? What's to keep people from still using the land for activities such as geocaching?

From the March 5 Seattle Times article:

 

Restrooms and gates would be locked. Services and routine maintenance would be halted. The public could still walk into the parks and use them during the day.

 

"We won't cite people for being on the land," said Painter.

Edited March 7, 2009 by hydnsek

[+GrnXnham]

So if they were "mothballed or abandoned" does this mean that we would lose access to them or does that mean that only the facilities within the park (restrooms, picnic tables, road maintenance) wouldn't be there any more?

 

Are they going to erect heavy gates and barbed wire to keep people out? What's to keep people from still using the land for activities such as geocaching?

From the March 5 Seattle Times article:

 

Restrooms and gates would be locked. Services and routine maintenance would be halted. The public could still walk into the parks and use them during the day.

 

"We won't cite people for being on the land," said Painter.

 

Thank you! That is good to know. Hopefully, nothing gets closed but if it does at least the parks won't be off-limits.

[+TotemLake]

So if they were "mothballed or abandoned" does this mean that we would lose access to them or does that mean that only the facilities within the park (restrooms, picnic tables, road maintenance) wouldn't be there any more?

 

Are they going to erect heavy gates and barbed wire to keep people out? What's to keep people from still using the land for activities such as geocaching?

From the March 5 Seattle Times article:

 

Restrooms and gates would be locked. Services and routine maintenance would be halted. The public could still walk into the parks and use them during the day.

 

"We won't cite people for being on the land," said Painter.

 

Thank you! That is good to know. Hopefully, nothing gets closed but if it does at least the parks won't be off-limits.

If I recall correctly, this isn't the first time the usage of on-site facilities were closed due to budget restraints. The parks themselves were always left open for general usage. Just be sure to pack out what you pack in. CITO becomse more critical for these areas as well. We can all do our civic part in this. Just consider it cache maintenance.

[+B+L]

From the March 5 Seattle Times article:

 

Restrooms and gates would be locked. Services and routine maintenance would be halted. The public could still walk into the parks and use them during the day.

 

"We won't cite people for being on the land," said Painter.

 

Sweet. I got the info second, or maybe third-hand and the source was probably has learned to be pretty cynical.

[+ironman114]

I am curious how they come up with the number of visitors a year.

 

I am personally aquainted with one park on the list.... Beacon Rock .

 

I have been down there several times this year to maintain and build trails there. There is no way to count the people visiting. tThere are no counters on the two roads to the trails and camping and nothing along HWY 14 to count cars stopping to use the bathrooms or climb the rock.

 

It is a very busy park even with snow and 40-50 mph winds on a couple of the days I was there.

 

I would hate for my efforts to build a new trail to be in vain.

[gonegeofishing]

I am curious how they come up with the number of visitors a year.

 

I am personally aquainted with one park on the list.... Beacon Rock .

 

I have been down there several times this year to maintain and build trails there. There is no way to count the people visiting. tThere are no counters on the two roads to the trails and camping and nothing along HWY 14 to count cars stopping to use the bathrooms or climb the rock.

 

It is a very busy park even with snow and 40-50 mph winds on a couple of the days I was there.

 

I would hate for my efforts to build a new trail to be in vain.

 

Your efforts shall not go in vain. Us locals shall still find a way to benefit from your hard work. Legally of course.

 

You raised a pretty good question. I drive by Beacon Rock six or seven times a week and have only seen a park service vehicle one time in the last four months. I cannot figure out how they come up with that count.

 

Glad to hear you have been enjoying our breezy winds in the Gorge

[+EraSeek]

On msn this morning: http://travel.msn.com/Guides/greenarticle....9&gt1=45002

[+Ambrosia]

I hadn't heard that Confluence was on the list. It doesn't make much sense, since it is heavily used for the boat launch and rv park. I would think that it is enough of an income to stay.

[+Ranger Smith]

I am curious how they come up with the number of visitors a year.

 

I am personally aquainted with one park on the list.... Beacon Rock .

 

I have been down there several times this year to maintain and build trails there. There is no way to count the people visiting. tThere are no counters on the two roads to the trails and camping and nothing along HWY 14 to count cars stopping to use the bathrooms or climb the rock.

 

It is a very busy park even with snow and 40-50 mph winds on a couple of the days I was there.

 

I would hate for my efforts to build a new trail to be in vain.

 

The numbers are taken from the car counters that are driven over with each vehicle that enters the park. You probably would never know that they are there unless you look for them at the entrance to each park.

 

I find it quite interesting that the governor simply did not reimpose the parking fee. The monies generated with the parking fee was more than the money she gave them in budget after it was revoked. Most persons who could not afford the fee was granted a free yearly pass.

 

As far as access is concerned,you will still be allowed to use the park. They belong to the people of the State of Washington. There will be no facilities including restrooms, no litter and garbage pickup, no maintenance done.

 

So much for the 2013 Centennial Celebration - 100 years of our State Parks!

[+TotemLake]

I am curious how they come up with the number of visitors a year.

 

I am personally aquainted with one park on the list.... Beacon Rock .

 

I have been down there several times this year to maintain and build trails there. There is no way to count the people visiting. tThere are no counters on the two roads to the trails and camping and nothing along HWY 14 to count cars stopping to use the bathrooms or climb the rock.

 

It is a very busy park even with snow and 40-50 mph winds on a couple of the days I was there.

 

I would hate for my efforts to build a new trail to be in vain.

 

The numbers are taken from the car counters that are driven over with each vehicle that enters the park. You probably would never know that they are there unless you look for them at the entrance to each park.

 

I find it quite interesting that the governor simply did not reimpose the parking fee. The monies generated with the parking fee was more than the money she gave them in budget after it was revoked. Most persons who could not afford the fee was granted a free yearly pass.

 

As far as access is concerned,you will still be allowed to use the park. They belong to the people of the State of Washington. There will be no facilities including restrooms, no litter and garbage pickup, no maintenance done.

 

So much for the 2013 Centennial Celebration - 100 years of our State Parks!

I'd be okay with reinstituting the parking fee. It was a minor inconvenience, and it was good for all state parks for the day.

[+B+L]

So much for the 2013 Centennial Celebration - 100 years of our State Parks!

 

My sentiments, exactly.

 

We also wondered about the user fees. No one likes them, but if they keep the parks open... Semi-related, we once returned to our car after backpacking and found a note on our windshield thanking us for having a NW Forest Pass. I guess because we had the only car displaying one, or at least when we arrived (late) no one else did. Fees would not help much if, like the Forest Pass, hardly anyone paid them, or if they went into the General Fund instead of the Parks Dept.

 

Well, at least we can amuse ourselves playing with the old fridges and piles of tires in the unmaintained parks.

[+EraSeek]

Listen I should probably not comment, I don't want to start a war, But the user fees imposed by the State parks irked me, for a couple of reasons. What happened to the taxes we pay to keep the parks going? The user fees were excessive for State parks. I'll bet you saw that in reduced usage. A national park you will spend a whole day there, where a state park you may just want to take the kid there for an hour, and you are not likely to go park hopping on one day's fee. If our taxes are no longer enough to keep things running than why the heck not put up a non-mandatory donation box. I'd much rather help fund the parks than be told I have to pay a tribute to the lords of our own public lands. Don't get me wrong I appriciate you guys, I just think it was done totally wrong. Why not start a public movement and get the public to work with you rather than make everthing a "stick-up".

The other reason it isn't going to work is because everyone is hurting right now. Jobs have been lost. Bills to pay. The market has fallen off a cliff. The bridges are about to fall down. The roads are full of potholes. Schools are closing. We are all in a fix. We all want parks, and rangers, but the whole infrastructure is threatened right now. Not just parks.

Sorry but when I visited Kayak county park, the ranger explained the "parking fee" to me and I said I'd just park somewhere else and he threatened me. That put a very bad taste in my mouth for "Parking fees" and those who impose it.

 

Please, consider voluntary support from the public as a way to keep things running.

[+ironman114]

I am curious how they come up with the number of visitors a year.

 

I am personally aquainted with one park on the list.... Beacon Rock .

 

I have been down there several times this year to maintain and build trails there. There is no way to count the people visiting. tThere are no counters on the two roads to the trails and camping and nothing along HWY 14 to count cars stopping to use the bathrooms or climb the rock.

 

It is a very busy park even with snow and 40-50 mph winds on a couple of the days I was there.

 

I would hate for my efforts to build a new trail to be in vain.

 

The numbers are taken from the car counters that are driven over with each vehicle that enters the park. You probably would never know that they are there unless you look for them at the entrance to each park.

 

I find it quite interesting that the governor simply did not reimpose the parking fee. The monies generated with the parking fee was more than the money she gave them in budget after it was revoked. Most persons who could not afford the fee was granted a free yearly pass.

 

As far as access is concerned,you will still be allowed to use the park. They belong to the people of the State of Washington. There will be no facilities including restrooms, no litter and garbage pickup, no maintenance done.

 

So much for the 2013 Centennial Celebration - 100 years of our State Parks!

 

I know that most parks use counters on the road. But Beacon Rocks is a little different than most.

 

Hwy 14 runs through the middle of it and anyone using the roadside bathroom and taking the trail up the rock won't go over a counter. If they did put up a road counter it would track EVERY car that went down the highway The camping area and other trails are on the other side of the road and have access roads leading to them. those two roads would count cars, but not those that park to climb the rock.

 

Even on a cold January day with snow blowing 40-60 mph there were a dozen cars there in just the half hour I was there. I am going back down next weekend, hopefully it won't snow on me for the third time.

 

Maybe we should give this park to Oregon. It was offered to Washington first and they refused it but changed their minds in 1935 when it was offered to Oregon. Oregon has found a way to keep their parks open.

[+Dgwphotos]

 

Maybe we should give this park to Oregon. It was offered to Washington first and they refused it but changed their minds in 1935 when it was offered to Oregon. Oregon has found a way to keep their parks open.

 

Umm, it makes no sense to give it to Oregon, nor do I suspect that the state would even consider that alternative.

[+klossner]

Oregon has found a way to keep their parks open.

Indeed we have: we charge a $3 parking fee at the bigger parks (like Champoeg.)

 

What irked me about the Washington park fees was that the Washington & Oregon Recreation Pass didn't cover them all. When I presented it at Maryhill State Park, the ranger was very apologetic. To her credit, when we explained that we wanted to sign a geocache log and move on, she let us in for free.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Restrooms and gates would be locked. Services and routine maintenance would be halted. The public could still walk into the parks and use them during the day.

 

...

 

Open Space was all we had before we built improvements. It's only fair that they revert to the open space they started as, when they quit funding the maintenance of the improvements.

 

OTOH it's an ideal situation where a volunteer group (non profit?) takes over administration of the parks that have a means to collect a day use fee. Espeically if that group is geocacher friendly. The day use fee pays to clean the bathrooms etc.

Edited March 10, 2009 by Renegade Knight

[+Renegade Knight]

Listen I should probably not comment, I don't want to start a war, But the user fees imposed by the State parks irked me, for a couple of reasons. What happened to the taxes we pay to keep the parks going?...

 

Absorbed into other budgets.

 

Same thing will happen when they talk about toll roads. "It will save the public money". No it won't. The tax for all roads will remain the same and on top of that, the toll road will collect a toll. It's worse if they privatize them since you now pay the tax, the toll, and profit. Plus since they normally make toll companies "buy the road" you will also pay for the purchase of the road that you already paid to build. The boost the budget gets from the "sale" of the road will get absorbed and just go away.

[+iHam]

A national park you will spend a whole day there, where a state park you may just want to take the kid there for an hour, and you are not likely to go park hopping on one day's fee.

The easy solution was to get the annual window sticker and be done with it...I was a bit annoyed when they dropped the fee...just a couple of weeks after we'd payed for the renewal on our sticker.

 

I do wish there were an "uber-sticker" that would cover forest service/state parks/wilderness areas/snow areas, etc., but that would require too many agencies in the gubmint to actually TALK TO EACH OTHER....

 

Sorry to see Dash Point on the list...it's a nice quick getaway from Federal Way and Tacoma....

[MarcusArelius]

 

I know that most parks use counters on the road. But Beacon Rocks is a little different than most.

 

Hwy 14 runs through the middle of it and anyone using the roadside bathroom and taking the trail up the rock won't go over a counter. If they did put up a road counter it would track EVERY car that went down the highway The camping area and other trails are on the other side of the road and have access roads leading to them. those two roads would count cars, but not those that park to climb the rock.

 

Even on a cold January day with snow blowing 40-60 mph there were a dozen cars there in just the half hour I was there. I am going back down next weekend, hopefully it won't snow on me for the third time.

 

Maybe we should give this park to Oregon. It was offered to Washington first and they refused it but changed their minds in 1935 when it was offered to Oregon. Oregon has found a way to keep their parks open.

 

I have seen those infrared animal counting devices placed fairly high along the iron horse. I wonder if they were using those to count "users".

[+Dgwphotos]

 

I know that most parks use counters on the road. But Beacon Rocks is a little different than most.

 

Hwy 14 runs through the middle of it and anyone using the roadside bathroom and taking the trail up the rock won't go over a counter. If they did put up a road counter it would track EVERY car that went down the highway The camping area and other trails are on the other side of the road and have access roads leading to them. those two roads would count cars, but not those that park to climb the rock.

 

Even on a cold January day with snow blowing 40-60 mph there were a dozen cars there in just the half hour I was there. I am going back down next weekend, hopefully it won't snow on me for the third time.

 

Maybe we should give this park to Oregon. It was offered to Washington first and they refused it but changed their minds in 1935 when it was offered to Oregon. Oregon has found a way to keep their parks open.

 

I have seen those infrared animal counting devices placed fairly high along the iron horse. I wonder if they were using those to count "users".

 

I've seen one as well, on the Iron Horse Trail between Thorp and Cle Elum.

[+Dgwphotos]

The Daily Record mentioned today that Olmstead Place State Park is also on the list for possible closure.

[+hydnsek]

The latest WTA newsletter has this to say:

 

Nearly three dozen State Parks could be on the chopping block this summer if the state moves forward with a proposed 23% budget cut for State Parks. This list includes Wallace Falls, Beacon Rock, Federation Forest, and Larrabee -- places where WTA volunteers have devoted many hours. You can find a full list here. (hydnsek notes: This table of 33 parks includes visitation, revenues, and expenditures.)

 

WTA is deeply saddened by the prospect of these closures. In the short-term, we are concerned that parks will fall prey to vandalism and deterioration if left completely unattended. We are asking the legislature to set aside funds for enforcement and maintenance on mothballed parks. In the long-term, we believe that State Parks needs more sustainable sources of revenue. Options currently being considered include a parking fee, an excise tax on RVs, and a new property tax. You can read more about these potential solutions on our website.

 

In the meantime, please help State Parks. Contact your state representatives and senator and urge them to pass legislation that will raise new, dedicated revenue for parks.

[+Lightning Jeff]

Not responding to Abby, but to WTA's statements...

In the long-term, we believe that State Parks needs more sustainable sources of revenue.

That would be nice, but we haven't even managed to do that for public education in this state. I love state parks, but I hope the Legislature addresses funding for public schools before it raises taxes for parks.

 

Options currently being considered include . . . an excise tax on RVs . . . .

This does irk me. A hiking organization (which I generally support) thinks the answer is to increase taxes on some other set of users - users who presently pay as much if not more to use the parks and, arguably, generate less costs for the parks (being self-contained, you don't see a lot of RV owners using restrooms/showers). Besides, an excise tax on all RVs would tax even those that never enter a state park. I think we should pay for parks and other public amenities through general taxes, but if we're going to use user fees they should be fair, not the result of sniping between different groups of users.

[luckykoi]

I'm glad I never bothered jumping through all the hoops to hide a cache in a State Park.

[luckykoi]

Listen I should probably not comment, I don't want to start a war, But the user fees imposed by the State parks irked me, for a couple of reasons. What happened to the taxes we pay to keep the parks going?...

 

Absorbed into other budgets.

 

Same thing will happen when they talk about toll roads. "It will save the public money". No it won't. The tax for all roads will remain the same and on top of that, the toll road will collect a toll. It's worse if they privatize them since you now pay the tax, the toll, and profit. Plus since they normally make toll companies "buy the road" you will also pay for the purchase of the road that you already paid to build. The boost the budget gets from the "sale" of the road will get absorbed and just go away.

 

Kitsap county started threatening to close its parks so the public voted for a tax increase. What did they do with the extra tax dollars? They took all the janitors who worked at the court house and gave them new uniforms and and put them on the parks payrolls but their jobs did not change at all. They still clean the court house.

[+Right Wing Wacko]

One of the reasons the state quit collecting the $5.00 fee was that it was costing them more money to collect it than it brought in. It also caused usage of the parks to plummet.

[+klossner]

One of the reasons the state quit collecting the $5.00 fee was that it was costing them more money to collect it than it brought in.

Interesting. The reports I read said just the opposite. Can you point me to a reference for this?

It also caused usage of the parks to plummet.

Yes. And it took the government down a path -- charging individuals for access to commons -- that is fundamentally anti-American. Next, can you imagine charging a fee to use a city neighborhood park?

[+Ranger Smith]

One of the reasons the state quit collecting the $5.00 fee was that it was costing them more money to collect it than it brought in.

Interesting. The reports I read said just the opposite. Can you point me to a reference for this?

It also caused usage of the parks to plummet.

Yes. And it took the government down a path -- charging individuals for access to commons -- that is fundamentally anti-American. Next, can you imagine charging a fee to use a city neighborhood park?

First things first, Washington State Parks had worked for years with NO budget, zip. Not collected from the taxpayers, not distributed to the parks. With no budget and no way to access funds for maintenance ( and I'm talking that the rangers were donating their lunch money once a week to buy fuel to run a weedeater), the historic buildings were falling in. After lawsuits from individuals stating that the State was obligated to maintain these structures, a way to collect funds was needed (remember, no taxes= no budget) A parking fee was thought to be best. It was NOT a usage fee.

The park staff fought hard to keep the fee reasonable and yet the legislature overrode them. The staff wanted a $3.00 fee, the legislature said $7.00 but that they would reduce it to $5.00.

City parks are funded by city taxes, contact your mayor and find out where from, how much, is it enough to sustain your parks, if not why, ....... Get involved and let them know you care for your parks and want them managed properly.......There your parks...VOLUNTEER!

[+ironman114]

One of the reasons the state quit collecting the $5.00 fee was that it was costing them more money to collect it than it brought in.

Interesting. The reports I read said just the opposite. Can you point me to a reference for this?

It also caused usage of the parks to plummet.

Yes. And it took the government down a path -- charging individuals for access to commons -- that is fundamentally anti-American. Next, can you imagine charging a fee to use a city neighborhood park?

First things first, Washington State Parks had worked for years with NO budget, zip. Not collected from the taxpayers, not distributed to the parks. With no budget and no way to access funds for maintenance ( and I'm talking that the rangers were donating their lunch money once a week to buy fuel to run a weedeater), the historic buildings were falling in. After lawsuits from individuals stating that the State was obligated to maintain these structures, a way to collect funds was needed (remember, no taxes= no budget) A parking fee was thought to be best. It was NOT a usage fee.

The park staff fought hard to keep the fee reasonable and yet the legislature overrode them. The staff wanted a $3.00 fee, the legislature said $7.00 but that they would reduce it to $5.00.

City parks are funded by city taxes, contact your mayor and find out where from, how much, is it enough to sustain your parks, if not why, ....... Get involved and let them know you care for your parks and want them managed properly.......There your parks...VOLUNTEER!

 

 

Yes I do volunteer. I have put 48 hours in at Beacon Rock in the last 4 months. I plan for more next month either at Beacon Rock or a N.F. Trail on the Skokomish River.

 

Many hands make light work.

[+Dgwphotos]

Lawmakers eye $5 car-tab fee to keep state parks open.

 

Personally, I think they should consider trying out the King County Parks business plan, which helped King County Parks become somewhat self sufficent.

[+Dgwphotos]

House approves $5 "opt-out" fee to help state parks

 

No Washington state parks to close

 

It looks like the chopping block was avoided, but we still get to pay the "fee".

[+Prying Pandora]

House approves $5 "opt-out" fee to help state parks

 

No Washington state parks to close

 

It looks like the chopping block was avoided, but we still get to pay the "fee".

$5 a year on my license tabs is peanuts compared to the $5 per day they used to charge for parking or the cost of the annual pass I bought a few years ago. I'll gladly pay that to keep our State Parks open.

[+klossner]

It looks like the chopping block was avoided, but we still get to pay the "fee".

Those of us with Oregon license plates thank you for that.

 

(I just bought my annual Washington and Oregon Recreation Pass, so Washington State Parks do get some money from me.)