WA Shooters Blast DNR Draft Proposal
by Dave Workman
Senior Editor
Shooters in Washington state are alarmed about possible regulation changes that could seriously curtail, if not completely stop, recreational shooting and even possession of firearms on public lands administered by the state Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
The draft proposals were handed out to members of an advisory committee that began meeting last fall. Gun Week obtained a copy of the draft, dated Nov. 28, 2005, that was distributed by a DNR staffer according to sources at that meeting. Gun Week’s calls to that staffer were not immediately returned.
However, DNR information officer Princes Jackson Smith insisted to Gun Week that “there is no proposed language, or a proposal of any kind” currently being considered by the DNR. Smith said the process of looking at possible changes to the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) regarding activities on public lands is just beginning. Members of the “WAC Revision Committee” will be meeting over the next several months, sources said.
At the bottom of each page in the nine-page draft document obtained by Gun Week is the notation “Department of Natural Resources” with the date of the meeting. Each page also is clearly marked “Subject to change or modification.” One member of a citizen’s committee studying the proposed changes in Washington has assured Gun Week via e-mail that “there will be significant change to this proposed regulation.”
Smith said she had no knowledge of the draft, and reiterated, “We’re going through the WAC revision process. But we have not proposed any language.”
Gun Week offered to provide her with a copy of the draft document, but she declined. The draft document contains both existing WAC language, and “proposed language.” Under the proposed general rule change listed under a heading of “Discharging Firearms,” the following prohibitions would apply to developed recreational facilities, including sites and trails:
“Possessing a firearm with a cartridge in any portion of the mechanism or discharging a firearm, bow and arrow, spear, spear gun, harpoon, or air or gas weapon, or any device capable of injuring or killing any person or animal, or damaging or destroying any public or private property, except where the department has authorized a special recreational activity.”
The new regulation, if adopted as written in the draft document, would also prohibit discharge of a firearm across, in or into any portion of a developed recreational trail.
Evergreen State gun rights activists are up in arms, although there appears to be far less concern over a second proposed regulation that is aimed at safety measures and litter prevention. Under that recommendation, shooters would be prohibited from using old televisions, computer monitors and propane tanks, for example, as targets. They would also have to pick up all of their brass and empty shotshells.
Dave Hiatt, a recreational shooting representative on the WAC Revision Committee, said, “The proposed WACs will create a closed-unless-posted-open policy for . . . shooting use of DNR land as written.”
Hiatt told Gun Week, “This needs to be stopped.”
However, Robert Brook, who represents horse riders on the committee, observed, “There are a number of real concerns in our recreational areas, firearms being one. I am sure that the advisory committee will have some thoughts and recommendations. . . . The best cure for all the issues we have is self-discipline of the user.”
Brooke told Gun Week that there have been incidents when he and other horsemen were riding in the Cascade Mountains on state lands that bullets have whizzed over their heads, fired by shooters who apparently aren’t shooting against a backstop. He is willing to give the process a chance to work, and suggested that there might be a final draft of proposed regulations by mid-summer.
The WAC Revision Committee is composed of representatives from hiking, horseback riding, ORV, shooting and other recreational interests.
Joe Waldron, legislative chairman of the Washington Gun Owners Action League and executive director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, is also alarmed at the draft regulation changes he has seen. He suggested in an e-mail to Hiatt, a copy of which was obtained by Gun Week, that the wording of the proposed WAC change indicates “a major land grab just over the horizon.”
Waldron told Gun Week he is also curious why the DNR’s official website alludes to public land as “state land” or “DNR land” when it is owned by the citizens of Washington state and only administered by that agency.
He predicted that activists would flood the office of Public Lands Commissioner Doug Sutherland with angry calls and e-mails.
National Concerns
The concerns of Evergreen State shooters reflects the sentiments of gunowners and other recreationists across the country who rely on public lands, either state or federal, for their activities.
A coalition of public land users based in Colorado is already waging war against the US Forest Service (USFS) over fees charged to citizens for access to publicly-owned national forest lands, and last summer, Gun Week investigated concerns that the USFS was wrongly interpreting an obscure regulation to prohibit recreational shooting on large tracts of public land in national forests all over the country.
The Western Slope No-Fee Coalition, founded about four years ago, has emerged as a watchdog organization that keeps tabs on the USFS on access issues.
This winter, the Washington legislature is considering a bill that would establish an “access charge” that the measure specifically says is not a “fee,” though that is open to debate. Under the bill, “A daily, seasonal or annual charge, not to exceed $10 per person, per day, and not to exceed $350 annually per person, for access to publicly or privately owned lands for the purposes of outdoor recreation where all revenues are devoted to land management costs reasonably related to providing the recreational access” would be allowed.
Even more alarming to some outdoorsmen, under the WAC regulations draft from Nov. 28, “Department roads, trails and other facilities are closed unless designated open.” That is a reversal of the current management structure, under which roads, trails and facilities are considered open unless designated closed.
Washington gun rights activists are furious, noting that the Washington state constitution specifically affirms the “right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state. . . .” Washington statute specifically allows the carrying of handguns by “Any person engaging in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding. . . .”
Also, state law specifically exempts licensed Washington citizens from certain firearm possession prohibitions placed on the general public.
Last month, various shooting organizations began paying close attention to the proposed WAC change. Alerts went out to the Tacoma Sportsmen and Pierce County Sportsman’s Council, and the Washington Wildlife Committee, which operates the Kenmore Gun Range north of Seattle, is also now scrutinizing the proposal.
James Williams, vice president of the Pierce County Sportsman’s Council and member of the Washington Arms Collectors board of directors, sent a letter to Public Lands Commissioner Doug Sutherland, opposing the changes as suggested in the Nov. 28 draft.
In his letter, Williams said the proposed change on firearms possession violates both the US and Washington state constitutions, and state firearms and self-defense statutes. He told Gun Week that, “I don’t like the fact that they’re going to tell me I can’t walk on public land (with) a firearm.”
He further wrote to Sutherland that the proposal to close all lands unless they are designated as open should be scrapped, because all it would take to keep land closed would be to tear down a sign and not replace it.
Early Warning
The DNR apparently has raised concerns about shooting on public lands before. Three years ago, the issue was raised during a meeting of the Capitol Forest Public Use and Stewardship Planning Committee. Gun Week obtained a copy of a report written to the Washington Arms Collectors by southwest Washington activist Joshua Amos, who attended that January 2003 meeting.
During that session, he asserted, a DNR “facilitator” gave strong indications that the agency was going to seek total authority over shooting on public lands, and more importantly, try various strategies to limit or eliminate shooting. This facilitator offered several recommendations to the citizen group specifically aimed at stopping recreational shooting.
Among those recommendations, according to Amos’ account of that meeting, were: to solicit comments from anti-gun homeowner groups without contacting any pro-gun organizations; to use noise pollution ordinances and non-specific “public safety” guidelines to restrict shooting, and approach county governments to create “no-shooting” zones that extend onto public land administered by the DNR.
He also alleged that one tactic suggested during that meeting was to post “No Shooting” signs in areas even though it might be perfectly legal to shoot at such locations.
One DNR staffer Amos identified as having attended that meeting was apparently the same individual who distributed the draft proposals to the WAC Committee this past November.
Gun Week could not verify these allegations, and in response to the Amos report to the Washington Arms Collectors, Public Lands Commissioner Doug Sutherland insisted that keeping public lands open to “recreation of all types is one of my highest priorities” in a letter that was published in the organization’s monthly news magazine.
He further stated, “My goal is to allow recreational shooters, hunters, hikers, ORV riders and neighbors all to enjoy state lands without conflict.”
Amos told Gun Week in a telephone interview that he stands by what he reported to the Washington Arms Collectors in 2003. He kept all of his notes from the meeting. He thought it strange that, despite his having volunteered to sit on any citizen committee that addressed shooting on public lands, he was not invited to the Nov. 28, 2005 meeting.
Return to Archive Index