Work Session Agenda Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission

September 19, 2018 Okanogan PUD, 1331 2nd Avenue, Okanogan, WA 98840

Commissioners: Chair Ken Bounds, Vice Chair Cindy Whaley, Secretary Patricia Lantz, Michael Latimer, Diana Perez, Steve Milner and Mark O. Brown. Director: Donald Hoch

Time: Opening session will begin as shown; all other times are approximate.

Public Comment: This is a work session between staff and the Commission. The public is invited but no public comment will be taken. No decisions will be made by the Commission at the work session.

9:00 a.m. CALL TO ORDER – Cindy Whaley, Commission Vice Chair • Call of the roll • Introduction of Staff • Changes to agenda • Logistics

9:05 a.m. 2019-21 OPERATING BUDGET UPDATE- Shelly Hagen, Assistant Director • This item provides the Commission with updated information regarding the 2019-21 operating budget proposal submitted to the Office of Financial Management

9:35 a.m. SUMMER OPERATIONS REPORT – Mike Sternback, Assistant Director • This item updates the Commission on events and highlights on the 2018 Summer season and field operations.

10:00 a.m. BREAK

10:15 a.m. CAPITAL PROJECTS LIST REFINEMENT- Peter Herzog, Assistant Director • This item outlines refinements to capital projects and budget figures staff has made subsequent to the Commission’s approval of its 2019- 21 capital budget submittal.

11:00 a.m. STAFF REPORTS

11:40 a.m. NASPD CONFERENCE

11:50 a.m. LUNCH

12:20 p.m. MID-YEAR COMMISSION/DIRECTOR IDENTIFIED PRIORITIES FOR 2018 UPDATE – Peter Herzog, Assistant Director 1

• This item updates the Commission on progress staff has made on 2018 performance measures included in the agency’s strategic plan and Director’s performance agreement.

1:00 p.m. LANDS MANUAL – Steve Hahn, Lands Program Manager • This item provides the Commission an overview of policy and procedural direction included the LANDS manual guiding the agency’s real estate activities.

1:30 p.m. TRIBAL RELATIONS – Peter Herzog, Assistant Director, Mike Sternback, Assistant Director, Ryan Karlson, Interpretive Program Manager, Makaela Kroin, Interpretive Specialist, Dan Meatte, Archeologist, and Alicia Woods, Collections Manager • This item provides the Commission an overview and examples of agency coordination and cooperation with Native American Tribes.

2:30 p.m. BREAK

2:40 p.m. TRIBAL RELATIONS continued

3:30 p.m. GOLDENDALE OBSERVATORY UPDATE

4:00 p.m. ADJOURN

The services, programs and activities of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission are covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you need special accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the commission assistant Becki Ellison at (360) 902- 8502 or [email protected]. Accommodation requests should be received at least five business days prior to the meeting to ensure availability. Please provide 14-day notice for requests to receive information in an alternative format and for ASL/ESL interpretation requests.

Commission Meeting Agenda Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission

September 20, 2018 Okanogan PUD, 1331 2nd Avenue, Okanogan, WA 98840

Commissioners: Chair Ken Bounds, Vice Chair Cindy Whaley, Secretary Patricia Lantz, Michael Latimer, Diana Perez, Steve Milner and Mark O. Brown. Director: Donald Hoch

Time: Opening session will begin as shown; all other times are approximate.

Order of Presentation: In general, each agenda item will include a presentation, followed by Commission discussion and then public comment. The Commission makes decisions following the public comment portion of the agenda.

Public Comment: Comments about topics not on the agenda are taken during General Public Comments.

Comments about agenda topics will be taken with each topic.

If you wish to comment at a meeting, please fill out a comment card and provide it to staff at the sign in table. The Chair will call you up to the front at the appropriate time. You may also submit written comments to the Commission by emailing them to [email protected] by 5 p.m. September 14, 2018.

9:00 a.m. CALL TO ORDER – Ken Bounds, Commission Chair • Flag Salute • Call of the roll • Introduction of Staff • Recognition of State and Local Officials • Approval of the Agenda • Approval of minutes of previous meetings: July 12, 2018, Vancouver

9:10 a.m. COMMISSIONER REPORTS

9:50 a.m. DIRECTOR REPORT

10:00 a.m. RECOGNITION • Volunteer Award • Gold Star Awards

10:10 a.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Pre-Arranged Speakers • Corey Gibson, Origin Generation

10:25 a.m. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS: Topics not on the agend

10:40 a.m. BREAK

10:55 a.m. WASHINGTON WILDLIFE AND RECREATION COALITION RESOLUTION

11:05 a.m. REQUESTED ACTION • Item E-1: Park Acquisition and Development Strategy - Candidate Park Selection Revision This item asks the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission to revise a list of three selected candidate properties for new park development.

11:45 a.m. EXECUTIVE SESSION

12:15 p.m. LUNCH

12:45 p.m. REPORT • Item E-2: Property Transfer and Disposal This item reports to the Commission the current status of properties that the Commission has authorized for transfer or disposal. This item additionally discusses implications of recently passed legislation regarding surplus of state lands.

1:30 p.m. REQUESTED ACTION • Item E-3: 2019 Supplemental Budget Requests This item asks the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission to: 1) approve the submittal of 2019 Supplemental Operating and Capital Budget Requests to the Office of Financial Management (OFM), and 2) authorize the Director to make changes to the dollars or items requested as needed to finalize the submittals.

2:15 p.m. REPORT • Item E-4: 2017-19 Financial Update This item reports to the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission on the status of: 1) State Parks’ 2017-19 biennium operating and capital budget expenditures and 2) Parks Renewal and Stewardship Account (PRSA) revenue.

2:45 p.m. REPORT • Item E-5: 2017/2018 Winter Recreation Program This item reports to the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission regarding the Winter Recreation Program and highlights program accomplishments.

3:30 p.m. ADJOURN

The services, programs and activities of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission are covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you need special accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Commission assistant Becki Ellison, at (360) 902-8502 or [email protected]. Accommodation requests should be received at least five business days prior to the meeting to ensure availability. Please provide 14-day notice for requests to receive information in an alternative format and for ASL/ESL interpretation requests. 4

Item E-1: Park Acquisition and Development Strategy - Candidate Park Selection Revision - Requested Action

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item asks the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission to revise a list of three selected candidate properties for new park development. This item advances the Commission’s strategy: “Develop amenities and acquire lands that advance transformation.”

SIGNIFICANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In July 2016, the Commission adopted a Statewide Acquisition and Development Strategy (Appendix 1) to guide the agency’s decision- making on land acquisition and park development. The Strategy indicates that the first implementation effort will be to identify a property for new park development from among those currently being held for future development, as well as an existing park to target for major park redevelopment.

The State Office of Financial Management (OFM) requires a predesign study for capital projects with costs exceeding $5 million. A predesign study is a document that explores alternatives, conveys programming information, and provides a cost estimate for a proposed capital project. The 2017-19 State Parks capital request included two predesign studies, one for a new state park, and one for a major park redevelopment. The New Park Predesign Study was funded, but the major redevelopment study was not. The New Park Predesign Study will include a process to engage staff, communities, and the public to select which of the three candidate properties to target first, and then it will explore alternatives and develop cost estimates for implementation. State Parks could then request capital funding to implement the study in subsequent biennia.

On November 17, 2016, the Commission approved the top three candidate properties for new park development: • Fisk State Park Property • Miller Peninsula State Park Property • Nisqually State Park

In addition to the predesign study for new park development, the 2017-19 capital request also included a separate request for a predesign study for Nisqually State Park. The Nisqually request was not funded in the 2017-19 capital budget, but the governor’s office has recently expressed support for the project. Staff now anticipates seeking funding for a Nisqually predesign study in the agency’s 2019 supplemental capital budget request. With Nisqually proceeding independently of the selection process for the New Park Predesign Study, staff would like the Commission to add one more candidate to be considered for new park development along with the Fisk and Miller Peninsula properties. Potential candidate properties currently held for future development include: • Dugualla • Forks of the Sky • Haley • Harstine Island (including Fudge Point and Scott) • Hoko River • Lake Isabella • Shine Tidelands (including Wolfe) 5

• Skating Lake • Sol Duc • Washougal River • Westport Light

The 2015 study Economic Analysis of Outdoor Recreation at Washington’s State Parks by Earth Economics showed that state parks benefit local communities through direct and indirect visitor expenditures, taxes, jobs, and ecosystem services. Some communities understand and support that contribution more than others. The strategic direction in the Statewide Acquisition and Development Strategy (Appendix 1) is for State Parks to focus its new acquisitions and developments primarily in communities that support state park development, and where there may be opportunities to partner with the communities to develop parks or assist in managing them.

From the list above, staff believes that Westport Light, Hoko River, and Forks of the Sky are the properties most likely to have strong community support.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission replace Nisqually with Westport Light State Park as the third candidate property for new park development. The City of Westport has been a consistent supporter of its local state parks (Grayland Beach, Twin Harbors, and Westport Light), and it has also expressed interest, through the Recreation Concession Area program, in partnering with State Parks or others to support the park. Westport Light is also a good candidate because of the 2015 acquisition of nearly 300 acres that served to join two state parks (Westport Light and Westhaven) into one. Additionally, development of Westport Light might also be part of a solution to the problem of flooding in the campground at nearby Twin Harbors State Park.

If the Commission approves the staff recommendation, staff will use the current New Park predesign funding to first engage communities and the public to select which of the three candidate properties (Fisk, Miller Peninsula, or Westport Light) should be developed first, and then to explore alternative development approaches and prepare cost estimates for implementation. LEGAL AUTHORITY: RCW 79A.05.030 Powers and duties – Mandatory

SUPPORTING INFORMATION: Appendix 1: Statewide Acquisition & Development Strategy

REQUESTED ACTION FROM COMMISSION: That the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission: 1. Select Westport Light State Park to replace Nisqually State Park as one of the three candidates to include in the agency’s selection process for its New Park Predesign Study. 2. Direct staff to work with the State Office of Financial Management to initiate actions necessary to revise the scope of the currently funded New Park Predesign Study as appropriate.

Author(s)/Contact: Nikki Fields, Parks Design and Land Use Planner [email protected] (360)902-8658 6

Reviewer(s): Jessica Logan, SEPA REVIEW: Following review, staff has determined that the proposed “Candidate Park Selection” was identified as a future phased action within the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist for the “Statewide Acquisition Development Strategy”. The “Determination of Non-Significance” for that action was issued on June 21, 2016. The specific selection of candidate parks proposed in this agenda item is categorically exempt from further SEPA review under WAC 197-800(17). Future proposals, if any, for the selected sites will also undergo SEPA, as part of phased review under WAC 197-11-060(5). Those proposals may be categorically exempt or may require a threshold determination. Christeen Leeper, Fiscal Impact Statement: Adoption of this requested action has no immediate fiscal impact. The fiscal impact on the operating budget will be assessed and identified as the projects are more fully developed. Operating costs will be identified, and funding will be requested through the budget process. Michael Young, Assistant Attorney General: August 1, 2018

Peter Herzog, Assistant Director

Approved for Transmittal to Commission

______Don Hoch, Director

APPENDIX 1 STATEWIDE ACQUISITION & DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY

Statewide Acquisition & Development Strategy

Washington State Parks & Recreation Commission Adopted July 21, 2016

Executive Summary The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission (State Parks) is developing a strategy to guide its land acquisitions and park developments in the years to come. The agency’s mission is to connect all Washingtonians to the state’s diverse natural and cultural heritage, and this mission provides the inspiration for the strategy.

The overarching strategic goal is for Washington’s state parks to be recognized as the collection of places and experiences that are distinctly Washington. To achieve that goal, the Deception Pass State Park state park system should include: • Places to be: Connecting people with Washington’s iconic landscapes • Stories to know: Engaging people in authentic Washington stories • Things to do: Providing Washington’s recreational mainstays • Ways to grow: Inviting novices to experience Washington’s outdoors • Something for everyone: Improving the quality of life for all Washingtonians For each of these goals, State Parks will complete a gap analysis to determine: • What State Parks has • Whether it has enough of it • What State Parks does not have • Whether another government or nonprofit has it • Whether another government or nonprofit should provide it instead of State Parks This gap analysis will be used to identify which undeveloped properties should be developed into new state parks first, which existing state parks should be redeveloped, and which areas should be targeted for new park acquisitions.

Background For the past 20 years, State Parks land Beacon Rock State Park acquisitions have fallen into two main categories:

1. Acquisitions within designated long-term park boundaries inside or adjacent to existing state parks or properties 2. Opportunistic acquisitions of lands for new state parks. About 90 percent of the acreage acquired by State Parks has been within or adjacent to existing park property. State Parks is developing long-range plans for each of its parks, and these plans include what is called a long-term park boundary. Long-term park boundaries identify the lands that should ideally be managed for park purposes.

In many cases, long-term park boundaries are larger than the current State Parks ownership, meaning the agency would consider purchasing the additional land, accepting it as a donation, or developing a management agreement with the owner. In some cases, existing park properties are found to be inconsistent with park purposes, and those properties are declared suitable for surplus. Long-term park boundaries are developed through a public process known as Classification and Management Planning (CAMP) and are approved by the seven-member State Parks and Recreation Commission (Commission).

Occasionally, State Parks has an opportunity to receive or purchase land for a new state park. In most cases, the agency has not intentionally sought out properties for new state parks, but has instead reacted to opportunities as they came up. For example, a landowner may contact State Parks seeking to donate or sell their property to the agency or a land trust may alert State Parks about a property being offered for sale.

Since the Great Recession, some legislators and members of the public have questioned why State Parks continues to acquire lands, since the agency’s reduced budgets have made it difficult to properly care for the parks and properties it already has. In this new political climate, State Parks is no longer able to make so many of its land acquisition decisions opportunistically. With shrinking budgets and increased scrutiny, the agency needs to base its acquisition decisions on clearly described goals and strategies.

New land acquisitions are often held for years or decades before they are developed into state parks. Such state park properties are said to be “held for future development.” Some of the properties currently being held for future development include:

Property Name County Acres

Burrows Island Skagit 395 Dugualla Island 601 Elbow Lake Thurston 319 Fisk Spokane 680 Forks of the Sky Snohomish 1,383 Harstine Island (Fudge Point) Mason 160 Harstine Island (Scott) Mason 100 Loomis Lake Pacific 400 Haley Pierce 163 Hoko River Clallam 400 Lake Isabella Mason 189 Miller Peninsula Clallam 2,613 Nisqually Pierce/Thurston 1,287 Shine Tidelands Jefferson 243 Skating Lake Pacific 336 Sol Duc Clallam 443 Washougal River Clark 474

Choosing which of these properties to develop next is not easy. New state parks cost millions to develop, and State Parks needs to divide its limited capital money wisely between new and existing parks. Such decisions should be based on how well a new park will support the State Parks mission and goals.

Similarly, in many existing developed state parks, most of the facilities are nearing the end of their useful lives. These parks need more than a capital improvement project here or there. They need major park redevelopments, and the agency needs a way to determine which park redevelopments should come first, based on clearly defined goals.

This Statewide Acquisition and Development Strategy is intended to guide State Parks in acquiring, developing, and redeveloping lands in a more intentional and directed manner. And it hopes to do so in a way that inspires and enlists local communities and partners to support and participate in park acquisition and development.

Assumptions State Parks developed this strategy with the following assumptions:

Long-Term Park Boundaries: Since the vast majority of State Parks land acquisitions occur within or adjacent to existing parks, long-term park boundaries adopted by the Commission during a CAMP process will remain the primary Hoko River State Park Property guidance for agency land acquisition and disposal. The CAMP process involves a tremendous amount of public outreach and input, opening lines of communication between State Parks, local governments, and adjacent landowners. The process and the product have been very successful, and this strategy assumes that will not change.

Existing State Parks: In the strategic planning effort leading up to the State Parks centennial in 2013, the agency reviewed its land holdings park-by park to determine whether each park was consistent with the agency vision. In cases where consistency with the vision was in question, State Parks considered transferring those parks to other public agencies. In almost every case, the public spoke out against such a transfer and against the notion that a park might be inconsistent with the State Parks vision. The process proved to be divisive and created ill will and distrust among those living near the affected parks. In the end, very few parks or properties were transferred to other agencies.

This Statewide Acquisition and Development Strategy assumes that the positioning of existing whole, developed state parks is not being questioned. The CAMP process will still consider whether any properties associated with a park might be surplus to the park’s purpose, but the agency is not seeking to divest of whole, developed state parks.

System Size: To continue meeting the needs of all Washingtonians, this new strategy assumes that the size and scope of the state park system will continue to grow and evolve to help address the demands of a growing and changing population. The state population is projected to increase by more than 20 percent in 20 years, and those bigger populations will need more parkland.

Diversity: This strategy assumes that the facilities and activities offered by state parks will need to adapt to meet the needs of evolving state demographics and values. Data show that different ethnic groups recreate in different ways. To serve all Washingtonians, state parks will need to provide facilities and activities that appeal to the diverse population of the state.

Another expected demographic shift will be toward an older population. The increase in the state’s population is mainly due to migration. Population growth due to “natural increase” (births > deaths) is slowing. As the state’s population ages, state parks will need to provide facilities and activities that appeal to, and are accessible MISSION by, older people. The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission cares for Washington’s most treasured lands, waters, and historic places. State Parks connect all Washingtonians to their diverse natural and cultural heritage and provide memorable recreational and educational experiences that enhance their lives.

Goals The goals for the Statewide Acquisition and Development Strategy stem from the State Parks mission, which is focused on connecting Washingtonians to their natural and cultural heritage.

The overarching goal is for Washington’s state park system to be recognized as the collection of places and experiences that are distinctly Goldendale Observatory State Park Heritage Site Washington. In other words, if a Washingtonian were to introduce someone else to the state:

• What kinds of places would they visit? • What kinds of stories would they tell? • What makes Washington treasured and unique?

State parks should be the ideal places to connect with what makes Washington special.

The strategy for achieving that vision includes five goals. The Washington State Parks system should be made up of:

Places to Be

• Conecting people with Washington's iconic landscapes

Stories to Know

• Engaging people in authentic Washington stories

Things to Do

• Providing Washington's recreation mainstays

Ways to Grow

• Inviting novices to experience Washington's outdoors

Something for Everyone

• Improving the quality of life for all Washingtonians

The following pages provide more detail on each of these goals.

Places to Be

Washington State Parks should seek to acquire and develop places that connect people with the state’s iconic landscapes, including:

• The Palouse • Dry forests • Rain forests • Puget trough lowland forests • Columbia basin coulees and reservoirs • Columbia River Gorge • Channeled scablands Riverside State RiversidePark State • Shrub-steppe • Salish Sea shorelines • Ocean beaches • Glacial lakes • Wild rivers

State Park

Palouse Falls State Park State Falls Palouse Historical Hills Columbia

Daroga State Park State Daroga

Curlew LakePark State

Stories to Know

Washington State Parks should seek to acquire and develop places that engage people in authentic Washington stories, including:

• Ice Age floods • Native American history and culture • Lewis and Clark exploration • Pioneer settlement • Civil War • Indian Wars • Ethnic immigration • Logging State Park • Coastal defense • Depression era Historical Hills Columbia • Hydroelectric power • Aerospace • Agriculture • Mining • Railroads • Navigation

Heritage Site

Jackson House State Park Park State House Jackson Deception Pass State Park

State Park Heritage Site Goldendale Observatory Observatory Goldendale Iron Horse State Park Trail Park State Horse Iron

Things to Do

Washington State Parks should provide places for people to enjoy Washington’s recreational mainstays, including:

• Walking and hiking • Cycling • Horseback riding • Picnicking • Fishing • Camping Beacon Rock State Park • Geocaching • Beach exploring • Boating • Skiing • Climbing

State Park Trail Park State Deception Pass State Park Spokane River Centennial Centennial River Spokane Potholes State Park Riverside State RiversidePark State

Ways to Grow

Washington State Parks should provide opportunities for recreational novices to get outdoors, experience what Washington has to offer, and progress in their skills. Such opportunities include:

• Urban gateways. There should be state parks in proximity to the state’s urban populations, and those parks should provide activities accessible to novices. • Multi-park recreation opportunities. State parks should offer systems of recreational facilities that encourage novices to explore multiple parks. Multi-park opportunities include: o Marine parks o Water trails o Cross-state trails o Winter recreation areas o Cabins and vacation rentals Saint Edward State State Saint Park Edward Deception Pass State Park Iron Horse State Park Trail Park State Horse Iron Blake Island Marine State Park State Marine Island Blake

Something for Everyone

Washington State Parks should improve the quality of life for all Washingtonians. Some of the benefits that state parks should provide include:

• Health • Conservation • Economic development • Transportation • Environmental and heritage education • Community identity • Intergenerational continuity Lake Sammamish State Park State Sammamish Lake

Kopachuck State Park Miller Peninsula Peninsula Miller State Park Property

Analysis For each of the five acquisition and development goals, State Parks will analyze:

• What does State Parks already have? For example, Gingko Petrified Forest State Park includes a shrub-steppe landscape, and Cape Disappointment Deception Pass State Park State Park is a good place to tell the story of the Lewis and Clark expedition.

• Does State Parks have enough properties that meet each goal, or are more needed? For example, the agency manages a number of parks that include Salish Sea shorelines. Should it continue to acquire shoreline properties?

• What kinds of properties does State Parks not have? For example, the agency is not yet telling the story of ethnic immigration in Washington. Should it seek out a place to tell this story?

• Does another government agency have the kinds of properties missing from the State Parks portfolio? For example, volcanos are an iconic Washington landscape, but the federal government provides opportunities to see Mount Rainier, Mount Saint Helens, and Mount Baker.

• When a gap is identified, would another government agency or nonprofit be better positioned to fill it than State Parks? For example, State Parks is not currently telling the story of aerospace in Washington, but perhaps that story is better told by the Museum of Flight or by local government agencies. Wherever it makes sense, State Parks will use geographic information systems (GIS) to assist with a gap analysis. For example, the map on the following page shows the distance between state parks that offer bicycle trails. Yellow areas are less than 10 miles from a state park with bicycle trails, and blue areas are more than 80 miles from a state park with bicycle trails. Maps like this can help the agency determine where it might be appropriate to develop new bicycle trails or to purchase property suitable for bicycle trail development.

To better analyze the factors making up the Something for Everyone goal, State Parks has been working with the science-based economic firm Earth Economics to develop a tool to analyze current and proposed park properties. With the tool, one can input basic information and land-cover types for a property, and the tool will estimate:

• Park revenue • Park visitation • Tax contributions to the state General Fund • Recreational benefits • Health and social benefits • Ecosystem services More work is needed to refine the tool, but in the end, it will be used to analyze the benefits that a park or a potential acquisition will offer for the state.

Strategic Direction The strategy to complete a gap analysis and work toward the State Parks acquisition and development goals has two main phases: initial direction and long-term direction.

Initial Direction (2016-2019)

The first effort in this strategy will be to Deception Pass State Park identify a property for new park development from among those currently being held for future development. In 2016, State Parks will submit a 2017-2019 capital budget request for a predesign study for the next new state park without specifying which property will be targeted. Then, using the goals in this strategy, State Parks will establish priorities for the properties being held for future development.

When the properties that best help to achieve one or more of this strategy’s goals are identified, State Parks will communicate with the communities near those properties to explain the benefits that state parks provide and to seek support and partnerships from the communities. State Parks will also seek feedback on the properties from the public statewide. The goal is for the Commission to select the next new state park in 2017. The agency will then use the capital funding to complete a predesign report on the selected park and request development funding for the 2019-2021 biennium.

State Parks will initiate a similar effort to decide which existing state park should be targeted for a major park redevelopment. The agency will request capital funding for a predesign report without specifying a park and then will use the Statewide Acquisition and Development Strategy goals and input from communities and the public to select a park in 2017 for redevelopment. State Parks will then complete the predesign report, and request redevelopment funding for the 2019-2021 biennium.

The initial strategic direction will also focus on refining the park benefits tool developed by Earth Economics and completing a first-run gap analysis using this strategy’s goals to determine:

• What State Parks has • Whether it has enough of it • What State Parks does not have • Whether another government or nonprofit has it • Whether another government or nonprofit should provide it instead of State Parks In the next three years, State Parks will also continue work designating long-term park boundaries through the public CAMP process. Currently, approximately 75 percent of the state parks have long-

term boundaries, and completing this work will help significantly with land acquisition decisions for the rest of the parks.

Long-Term Direction (2018 - )

The long-term strategy will be to complete a CAMP process for every park. Commission-adopted long- term park boundaries will continue to be the primary guidance driving land acquisitions within or adjacent to existing state parks.

State Parks will also continue assembling data to refine the initial gap analysis to target areas of interest to guide new park acquisitions. New park acquisitions will focus on properties that either satisfy several of this strategy’s five goals or that satisfy one or two of them very well. For example, a property might be targeted if it were the best place in the state to tell an important Washington story. Although most new park acquisitions should stem from this strategy, State Parks will continue to remain open to acquiring new chance-of-a-lifetime properties if opportunities arise.

Another long-term goal is to continue using this strategy’s goals to cyclically prioritize and select parks for development or redevelopment. This will allow State Parks to meet the needs of Washington’s growing and shifting population.

Finally, State Parks will use the refined gap analysis to measure the agency’s progress toward its goal to be recognized as the collection of places and experiences that are distinctly Washington.

E-2: Property Transfer and Disposal - Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item reports to the Commission the current status of properties that the Commission has authorized for transfer or disposal. This item additionally discusses implications of recently passed legislation regarding surplus of state lands. This item advances the Commission’s strategy: “Adopt a business approach to park system administration.”

SIGNIFICANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Earlier this year, staff from the United State Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Little Pend Oreille National Wildlife Refuge inquired with agency staff about potential transfer of the agency’s Crystal Falls Property, in Stevens County. Staff had since worked with USFWS to develop a transfer proposal for Commission action. However, staff recently learned that USFWS is not currently in a position to accept transfer as previously requested.

Although transfer of Crystal Falls is no longer a matter under consideration, staff has prepared this report to review policy guiding property disposal, update the status of properties previously authorized for disposal, and to outline recently passed legislation pertaining to surplus of state lands.

Statutory Authority and Commission Policy Guiding Surplus Property Findings RCW 79A.05.170 allows transfer of property at no fee to another government if these lands are “surplus to the needs of the state for development for state park purposes.” Transfers under this statute require the receiving jurisdiction to retain the property perpetually for recreational purposes. Use of land for non- recreational purposes can constitute a conversion and obligate the local government to reimburse State Parks for the value of the converted land. Appendix 3 provides excerpts from Commission policy guiding surplus finding under this statute.

RCW 79A.05.175 authorizes the Commission to dispose of land that it finds “cannot advantageously be used for park purposes.” Findings under this statute require unanimous Commission consent. Land disposal must then be either at auction or exchange for land of equal value. Appendix 4 provides excerpts from Commission policy guiding surplus of agency-owned lands under this statute.

RCW 39.33.010 provides additional authority for the Commission to transfer or sell land to other state or local government under mutually agreed upon terms. Authority granted under this statute can be used in special circumstances where the preceding statutes do not cleanly apply. For example, in 2013, the Commission used this authority to sell the land-locked Squaxin Island State Park to the Squaxin Island Tribe.

Centennial Vision Through a series of actions in 2005, the Commission evaluated its parks and undeveloped properties for consistency with its Centennial 2013 Vision. This evaluation assessed all agency lands using nine factors: significance, popularity, experiences, uniqueness, flora/fauna, scenery, size, condition, and revenue. Based on this evaluation, the Commission determined twenty-nine properties were not consistent with its Centennial 2013 Vision.

Subsequent to determinations of consistency, the Commission also found these properties were surplus to the Commission’s needs for park purposes. Staff has since divested of eleven of the twenty-nine sites authorized. Table 1 includes a listing of the remaining eighteen properties that remain in agency ownership.

TABLE 1: Commission Declared Surplus Properties per RCW 79A.05.175

Park/Property Name Acres County Decision Date Auburn Property 1.6 King 2015 Battle Ground Lake 0.5 Lewis 2007 Bottle Beach (2 parcels) 1 Grays Harbor 2007 Columbia Plateau Trail 106.2 Franklin 2007 Crystal Falls 156.2 Stevens 2007 Ginkgo (parcel B) 8.3 Kittitas 2007 Grayland (parcel A) 1.3 Grays Harbor 2007 HJ Carroll 3 Mason 2007 Ice Caves 159 Chelan 2007 Kitsap Memorial 4 Kitsap 2007 Lake Newport 160 Pend Oreille 2005 Mount Spokane (Nelson Rd) 40 Spokane 2005 Nolte 27 Pierce 2013 Riverside (Charles Road) 1.3 Spokane 2005 Riverside (Old Trails) 40 Spokane 2005 Riverside (4 small lots) 2.3 Spokane 2005 Sun Lakes (Lake Lenore) 40 Grant 2007 Willapa Hills Trail 3 Pacific 2007

18 Properties 754

The Surplus Process Flow Chart Appendix 1 details the process through which staff evaluates properties for current and future utility in meeting the Commission’s Mission, Vision and Strategic Plan. In 2015, staff used this process to evaluate all agency-owned parks and properties as part of a legislative budget proviso. This exercise concluded that 117,900 acres (88%) of the 134,000 acres of agency-owned or managed lands are “well used” for the purpose for which they were originally acquired. The remaining 16,100 acres were considered underutilized. 8,764 acres of underutilized lands included properties like Miller Peninsula or Fisk that are held for future development and 3,746 acres are either Commission-adopted Recreational Concession Areas (RCA’s) or candidate RCA’s and are proposed for recreational development by others. The remaining 3,616 acres are either Commission declared surplus lands or are candidate surplus lands.

In addition to properties listed in Table 1, through the agency’s Classification and Management Planning (CAMP) process, the Commission has identified twenty-seven properties totaling 1,646 acres that lie outside adopted long-term park boundaries. Staff has held discussions with other government jurisdictions regarding the transfer of seven of these properties and is currently initiating talks with other jurisdictions regarding an additional four properties. Should any of these discussions result in preliminary agreement, a finding by the Commission that a property is surplus under the appropriate statute would then be required prior to any transfer.

Park Acquisition and Development Strategy Commission real estate policy requires “When considering any transfer or exchange of state parks or state park properties to other government jurisdictions, the Commission should evaluate efficacy of the proposed transaction(s) using criteria derived from strategic goals or direction as expressed in adopted

strategic planning documents. The Commission’s updated Strategic Plan and its adopted Park Acquisition and Development Strategy are examples of strategic planning documents with which any proposals for surplus or transfer of agency-owned lands must be consistent.

Limits on Authority Delegated to Staff By Commission policy, any transactions to dispose of real property authorized by the Commission must be completed within ten years of Commission authorization. All but two of the properties listed in Table 1, the Commission has found were surplus more than ten years ago. The Commission now faces a choice to either extend the ten-year period authorized in policy or to conduct a new process through which to evaluate these properties and consider them for surplus.

Staff anticipates working with the Commission Real Estate Committee to determine the most appropriate method through which to address lapsed authority to transfer or dispose of surplus lands. Staff also anticipates working with the Committee to evaluate properties lying outside adopted long-term park boundaries to determine how best to bring them to the Commission for surplus consideration under statute.

2018 Legislative Action: The State Legislature passed a bill in the 2018 session that is expected to impact surplus of state park lands. HB 2382 was intended to make state surplus lands available for affordable housing. In summary, the bill: • Requires State Parks to produce a list annually of all lands that are a) currently vacant and b) available for lease, sale or transfer and then provide this list to the Community Trade and Economic Development agency (CTED) • Requires CTED to then provide the list to anyone interested in developing lands for affordable housing • Allows any private developer to then ask State Parks to transfer any property on the list provided to CTED at no cost, provided they develop the property for low-income housing

The Commission is not compelled to agree to any request from a private developer, but would be legally allowed to lease, sell, or transfer property at low/no cost due to the public benefit of providing low- income housing. Staff anticipates working with the Commission Real Estate Committee to determine which lands designated as surplus or that are potentially surplus may be appropriate for lease, sale or transfer under this legislation. An example of a State Park property which is vacant, available for sale or lease and meets a hypothetical definition of a property suitable for affordable housing would be the Auburn property which the Commission designated as an Enterprise property in March of 2015.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION:

Appendix 1: Property Evaluation Flowchart Appendix 2: Commission Policy Supporting RCW 79A.05.170 Appendix 3: Commission Policy Supporting RCW 79A.05.175

Author/Contact: Steve Hahn, Real Estate Program Manager [email protected] (360) 902-8683

Reviewers: 26

Jessica Logan, SEPA: Pursuant to WAC197-11-704 and WAC 352-11-055(2)(c), staff has determined that this Commission agenda item is a report and therefore is not subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. Christeen Leeper, Fiscal Impact Statement: Report only, no impact at this time. Michael Young, Assistant Attorney General: August 1, 2018 Assistant Director, Peter Herzog

Approved for Transmittal to Commission

______Don Hoch, Director

APPENDIX 1 Property Evaluation Flowchart

APPENDIX 2

March 2018 Policy Excerpt In Support of RCW 79A.05.170

55-17- 1 Fee-Simple Property Acquisition & Disposal (in part)

B. Property Transfers. State Parks may transfer lands without financial compensation to another government jurisdiction when the Commission unanimously finds that the lands are surplus to the needs of the state for development for state park purposes (RCW 79A.05.170). State Parks may sell or exchange lands when the Commission unanimously finds that lands cannot advantageously be used for park purposes (RCW 79A.05.175). Consistent with these statutes, State Parks will actively and strategically manage its real estate holdings to improve and enhance the quality and extent of State Parks’ recreation and conservation opportunities to best meet the needs of this and future generations of Washington residents and visitors. 1. State Parks will, under specific circumstances, consider transfer, sale, and exchange of agency- owned property to other government jurisdictions, including Native American tribal governments, as an appropriate mechanism through which to redirect resources and, in part, achieve its strategic land management goals. 2. State Parks will consider originating transfer of all or part of state parks or state park properties to other government jurisdictions only when the Commission unanimously finds a park or property is surplus to its needs consistent with RCW 79A.05.170. The Commission may make such a finding when: a. A catastrophic natural disaster or event has either closed or significantly impacted the use of the park or property for state park purposes; or

b. Legal or physical access to the park or property has been lost (e.g., court action, title claim, or condemnation proceeding), or when

c. All or part of a park or property does not sufficiently advance the Commission’s strategic goals or direction as expressed in its adopted strategic planning documents or other actions.

3. State Parks will consider originating transfer of all or part of a state park or state park property to other government jurisdictions when necessary to address insufficient agency financial resources to continue operation of the site or as directed by the Legislature. The Commission will consider and approve such transfers only as provided in RCW 79A.05.170 and RCW 79A.05.175. 4. State Parks will consider requests from other government jurisdictions for transfer or sale of all or part of a state park or state park property to other government jurisdictions when the

Commission unanimously finds that a park or property is surplus to its needs consistent with RCW 79A.05.170 or RCW 79A.05.175. The Commission may make such a finding when: a. All or part of a state park or state park property is considered an inholding in another government entity’s real estate ownership or other formally established property acquisition boundary (e.g., Tribal reservation, wilderness area, state wildlife area, state natural resource conservation area, local community forest or park); or when

b. It can be demonstrated that transferring ownership of all or part of a park or park property to another government jurisdiction will better achieve the property’s originally intended purpose or otherwise better advance the Commission’s recreation or conservation mission.

5. State Parks will only consider originating or evaluating requests for exchange of all or part of a parks or park property when the Commission finds that a park or park property is surplus to its needs consistent with RCW 79A.05.175. The Commission will make such a finding only when an exchange transaction will result in a significant net benefit to the State Parks’ statewide recreation or conservation mission.

6. When considering any transfer or exchange of state parks or state park properties to other government jurisdictions, State Parks should evaluate the efficacy of the proposed transaction(s) using adopted criteria to analyze the degree to which a potential real estate transaction: a. Demonstrates the benefits from protection of natural and cultural resources

b. Advances the business interests of State Parks

c. Enhances the recreation, cultural, and interpretive opportunities that people want

d. Promotes meaningful opportunities for volunteers, friends, and donors

e. Forms strategic partnerships with other agencies, tribes, and non-profits

f. Expands use of land-holdings for compatible revenue generating purposes

g. Develops amenities or acquires lands that advance transformation

APPENDIX 3

March 2018 Policy Excerpt In Support of RCW 79A.05.175

55-17- 1 Fee-Simple Property Acquisition & Disposal (in part)

II. PROPERTY DISPOSALS 30

A. Surplus Park Lands. State Parks may dispose of parklands only as authorized by statute. Surplus park property may be sold only after unanimous Commission declaration in open session of a regularly scheduled or special meeting that the property to be sold is surplus to the needs of the state park system. Disposal of surplus park lands pursuant to RCW 79A.05.175 shall be guided by the following:

1. Staff will clearly separate the two processes of 1) designating a parcel of park lands surplus to the needs of State Parks and 2) conducting subsequent property improvements, entitlements, and sale activities with respect to such park lands.

2. Staff will seek to maximize the return to the State Parks system from the sale of any park lands declared surplus by the Commission, unless otherwise specifically directed by the Commission. Staff may determine that property improvements or entitlements are warranted prior to the sale of surplus property. The Commission acknowledges that prudent investments through reasonable property improvements of surplus property will return a net, positive economic value on the date of sale. Investments of this type are in the best interest of the State Parks.

3. Prior to recommending disposal of surplus property to the Commission, staff will consider off- setting benefits or payments from third parties, in support of Commission goals to protect open space and natural areas. Surplus park lands shall be transferred in a natural condition, consistent with existing Commission policies and values (environmental, cultural, historic, and recreational) when such transfers are economically feasible or environmentally warranted.

4. The Commission may designate selected surplus lands as Enterprise Lands. Rather than being sold, Enterprise Lands will be offered for lease to public or private parties for the purpose of generating revenue for the State Parks system. a. State Parks will not acquire new lands solely for the purpose of leasing them as Enterprise Lands, but it may purchase lands that are not suited to park purposes as part of a larger transaction that secures high-quality park properties. In these instances, State Parks may retain the unsuited lands for an Enterprise Lands designation. b. If State Parks is unsuccessful in executing Enterprise Lands leases with qualified parties after suitable periods of time and reasonable efforts have been made to advertise the opportunities, the subject lands may be sold or otherwise disposed of without further Commission action as provided by statute (RCW 79A.05.175).

III. PROPERTY EXCHANGES. Property exchanges will be authorized by the Commission and comply with RCW 79A.05.175 and 79A.05.180.

Item E-3: 2019 Supplemental Budget Requests – Requested Action

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item asks the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission to: 1) approve the submittal of 2019 Supplemental Operating and Capital Budget Requests to the Office of Financial Management (OFM), and 2) authorize the Director to make changes to the dollars or items requested as needed to finalize the submittals. This item advances the Commission’s strategy: “Adopting a business approach to park administration.”

SIGNIFICANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the time this report was written, OFM had not issued their 2019 supplemental budget instructions. However, historically, previous instructions asked agencies to limit requests to: . Non-discretionary changes in legally-mandated caseloads or workloads . Necessary technical corrections . Additional federal or private/local funding . Unexpected cost increases . Highest priority policy enhancements consistent with the Governor’s priority goals

The expected due date of the supplemental requests is the first part of October.

Supplemental Operating Budget Request. To develop this proposal, the budget office worked with divisions/sections and programs to determine funding needs that met the above criteria.

In addition, consideration was given to the amount of available dollars in the PRSA to pay for the supplemental request. The current projected PRSA ending fund balance is $4.6 million. However, recent positive revenue collection trends cause staff to believe that sufficient dollars will be available to support the portion of the proposed supplemental request that relies on PRSA spending authority. This proposal targets an approximate $5.0 million June 30, 2019 ending fund balance, which is consistent with the proposed 2019-21 Operating Budget Request.

The supplemental operating budget proposal is contained in Appendix 1.

Supplemental Capital Budget Request. Over the last couple of months, Parks Development, Park Operations, and budget staff worked together to identify capital projects that need additional dollars to implement and meet OFM’s criteria. This review resulted in the proposal contained in Appendix 2.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the supplemental requests as proposed.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION: Appendix 1: 2019 Operating Budget Supplemental Request Appendix 2: 2019 Capital Budget Supplemental Request

REQUESTED ACTION OF COMMISSION: That the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission:

1. Authorize the Director to submit operating and capital supplemental budget requests to the Office of Financial Management as proposed in Appendices 1 and 2. 2. Authorize the Director to make changes to dollar amounts and items in the supplemental requests as needed for finalization and submittal to the Office of Financial Management.

______Author/Contact(s): Shelly L. Hagen, Assistant Director, Administrative Services [email protected], (360) 902-8621

REVIEWS: Jessica Logan, SEPA Review: Following review, staff has determined that the action proposed for the Commission by staff is exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (14)(c) Chris Leeper, Fiscal Impact Review: Fiscal impacts are represented in the requested action. Michael Young, Assistant Attorney General: 8/21/18

Approved for Transmittal to Commission

______Don Hoch, Director

Appendix 1 WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 2019 SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATING BUDGET REQUEST

Title/Description of Agency Request FTEs Dollars Fund

113,000 PRSA Unemployment Costs 0.0 38,000 GF-S Costs associated with 1) layoffs caused by the delay in funding of the 2017-19 Capital Budget, and 2) 2015-17 one-time staffing hired to work on preventive maintenance.

Discover Pass Fulfillment 0.0 114,000 PRSA

Additional costs for printing and fulfillment of Discover Passes resulting from higher demand for passes than originally projected.

Spending Authority Increase - PRSA Private/Local 0.0 195,000 PRSA - PL

Increase spending authority to expected level of spending.

Utility Costs Increase 0.0 200,000 PRSA

Pay for increased cost of utilities due to rate increases and higher consumption.

Forest Health and Wildfire Efforts 0.0 200,000 PRSA

Cover costs associated with the impact of wildfires for response and recovery effort at Gingko [and other parks]. Treatment for about 1,000 acres for Bark Beetles.

Virtual Private Network Access & Wi-Fi Services 0.0 43,000 PRSA

Cover costs for secure access via the use of VPN (virtual private network) fobs to the Law Enforcement Record Management System. Costs paid to internet service providers for wireless service to Pacific Beach, Potholes and Dry Falls State Parks.

1.5 285,000 PRSA Operating Impacts from Completed Capital Projects 0.5 95,000 GF-S Acquisition, development, construction and renovation projects of park facilities frequently result in higher operating costs. Examples of projects to be completed in 2017-19 with operating impacts include: Lake Easton RV hookup replacement; Belfair Welcome Center replacement; Kukutali day use development.

5.0 225,000 PRSA Seasonal Park Staffing - Policy Level 1.5 75,000 GF-S Additional seasonal, park staff for peak season - May and June. Corresponds with 19-21 budget request for seasonal staff (estimate 40 positions).

Total Request 0.0 1,583,000

Fund Summary FTEs Dollars General Fund 0.0 208,000 Parks Renewal and Stewardship Account (PRSA) 0.0 1,180,000 Parks Renewal and Stewardship Account (PRSA) - Private Local 0.0 195,000 Total Request 0.0 1,583,000

Appendix 2 WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 2019 SUPPLEMENTAL CAPITAL BUDGET REQUEST

Title/Description of Agency Request Dollars Fund

Steamboat Rock - Build Dunes Campground 900,000 057-1 Cost increases due to project delay after contract award. State Parks needed to stop work on the project while issues were being resolved.

Nisqually Predesign 150,000 057-1 Supplemental request for reimbursement of predesign costs for a potential new park development project.

Total Request 1,050,000 057-1

Note: Fund 057-1 is the State Building and Construction Account

Item E-4: 2017-19 Financial Update - Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item reports to the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission on the status of: 1) State Parks’ 2017-19 biennium operating and capital budget expenditures and 2) Parks Renewal and Stewardship Account (PRSA) revenue. This item advances the Commission’s strategy: “Adopting a business approach to park system administration”.

CURRENT BIENNIUM FINANCIAL INFORMATION (2017-19)

2017-19 Biennium Operating Budget and Expenditures: State Parks’ 2017-19 biennial operating budget is $166.6 million. The amount of budget that funds general operations is $145.5 million with dedicated program funding at $21.1 million. Of the $145.5 million, $29.8 million is supported by tax dollars from the General Fund, Pension Stabilization Account and Litter Tax revenue. The remainder is supported by earned revenue.

As of July 31, the agency spent $87.5 million; of which, $76.4 million was for general operations. Overall spending is 52.5% of the biennial spending plan and is on target. Because the agency is operating at below needed funding levels, the agency continues to prioritize spending to optimize resources and balance business needs across the agency.

The July 31, 2018 PRSA fund balance is $12.9 million. This balance is $5.0 million higher than the April 2018 balance, which was the lowest point for this biennium’s fund balance so far. The fund balance will continue to increase during the peak park season and then decline during the off season.

2017-19 Biennium Capital Budget and Expenditures: State Parks’ 2017-19 capital budget now totals $94.5 million. Of this total, $66.4 million is from the State Building and Construction Account. The $66.4 million is comprised of $50.5 million for new projects, and $15.9 million for re-appropriated projects. In addition, spending authority and grant dollars are available and currently total $28.1 million.

As of July 31, the agency spent a total of $20.4 million; $6.5 million on new projects, $9.3 million on re-appropriated projects and $4.6 million on grant related projects.

2017-19 Biennium Revenue: The earned revenue forecast is $111.4 million as of July 31, 2018. In addition, the agency will receive $9.0 million in Litter Tax revenue that will be deposited into the PRSA account for a total of $120.4 million in expected revenue.

Collectively, PRSA revenue collections for Discover Pass sales, camping, cabins and other lodging, “opt-out” donations through the Department of Licensing, and other earned revenue are 2.4% ($1.5 million) above estimates.

Comparing biennium-to-date revenue collections against estimates for the five categories shows: 1) Discover Pass revenue is 3.7% above projection 2) Revenue from camping is 0.6% below projection 3) Cabins and other lodging revenue are 1.5% above projection 4) Donations through the “opt out” program are 3.2% above projection 5) Other revenue sources are 6.4% above projection

The next update to the earned revenue forecast is in September 2018.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION Appendix 1: 2017-19 Operating and Capital Budget Financial Report Appendix 2: 2017-19 Parks Renewal and Stewardship Account (PRSA) Revenue Summary ______

Author/Contact(s): Shelly Hagen, Assistant Director, Administrative Services [email protected], (360) 902-8621

Reviewer(s): Jessica Logan, SEPA Review: Pursuant to WAC197-11-704, staff has determined that this Commission agenda item is a report and therefore is not subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. Christeen Leeper, Fiscal Review: Report only, no fiscal impact. Michael Young, Assistant Attorney General: 8/20/18

Approved for Transmittal to Commission

______Don Hoch, Director

APPENDIX 1 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET FINANCIAL REPORT 2017-19 BIENNIUM As of July 31, 2018

PARKS RENEWAL AND STEWARDSHIP ACCOUNT (PRSA) REVENUE SUMMARY 2017-19 Biennium As of July 31, 2018

Percent Actuals Biennial Estimate Actuals Variance To Over/Under To Revenue Category Estimate To Date To Date Date Date Discover Pass Sales 41,250,000 22,837,000 23,681,831 844,831 3.7% Camping & Related Sources 35,586,000 21,813,500 21,689,374 (124,126) -0.6% Cabins/Yurts/Other Lodging 5,477,000 3,059,000 3,104,206 45,206 1.5% License Renewal Donations 13,066,000 7,041,700 7,270,375 228,675 3.2% Other * 16,042,000 8,526,300 9,074,955 548,655 6.4% Subtotal 111,421,000 63,277,500 64,820,741 1,543,241 2.4%

Litter Tax 8,999,996 5,333,332 5,333,333 1 0.0% Totals 120,420,996 68,610,832 70,154,074 1,543,242 2.2% * Other revenue sources include leases, reservation fees, retreat centers, boat moorage and watercraft launch fees, day use fees, etc.

Percent of Revenue Collected by Source

Discover Pass Sales 33.8% 7.6%

Camping Related Sources 30.9% 12.9%

33.8% Cabins/Yurts/Other Lodging 4.4%

10.4% License Renewal Donations 10.4%

Other 12.9% 4.4%

Litter Tax 7.6% 30.9%

Item E-5: 2017/2018 Winter Recreation Program - Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item reports to the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission regarding the Winter Recreation Program and highlights program accomplishments This item advances the Commission’s strategy: “Providing recreation, cultural, and interpretive opportunities people will want”.

SIGNIFICANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION In June 2008, the Commission adopted a 10-year strategic plan for the Winter Recreation Program and directed staff to annually report progress on implementation. One of the Guiding Principles of the plan was that the program be more clearly integrated as a program of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission. In January 2018 the Assistant Director of Operations approved the updated 10- year strategic plan for the Program. This plan was collaboratively updated with both Program Advisory Committees, many partners, including the Washington State Snowmobile Association and various clubs representing snowmobiling and non-motorized users.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION Appendix 1: Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission Winter Recreation Strategic Plan 2018-2028 Appendix 2: Snowmobile Advisory Committee and Winter Recreation Advisory Committee members

Author: Pamela McConkey, Winter Recreation Program Manager [email protected] (360) 902-8595 Reviewer(s): Jessica Logan, SEPA Review: Pursuant to WAC197-11-704, staff has determined that this Commission agenda item is a report and therefore is not subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. Christeen Leeper, Fiscal Review: Report only, no fiscal impact. Michael Young, Assistant Attorney General: Report only, no impact at this time. Mike Sternback, Assistant Director

Approved for transmittal to Commission

Don Hoch, Director

WINTER RECREATION PROGRAM REPORT

The Winter Recreation Program consists of the following components: • Snowmobile • Non-Motorized Winter Recreation

The Winter Recreation Program consists of a total of 4.25 FTEs, a Program Manager, Operations Manager, Administrative Assistant, and Office Assistant and shared Fiscal Analyst.

Budgets: Staff working with the appropriate Advisory Committees held summer funding meetings to review the expenditures of the past Fiscal Year and recommend the budgets for the current Fiscal Year and the 2018/2019 Winter Season. Each program experienced a decrease in revenue over the previous year due to a late and sporadic snow fall. This type of snow event results in a decreased in snowmobile registration and a decrease in sno-park permit sales.

The Winter Recreation Programs: Both the Snowmobile Program and the Non-Motorized Program are self-sustaining; the snowmobile program relies on fees from snowmobile registrations and fuel tax revenue to fund operations. The Non- Motorized Program relies solely on fees from Sno-Park Permit sales to fund operations.

Snowmobile Program: The Snowmobile Program is a self-sustaining program relying on fees from snowmobile registrations and fuel tax revenue to fund operations. The fuel tax refund and registration fees collected each year will add up to approximately $94.20 per snowmobile to help fund the program. Current snowmobile registration is $50 per snowmobile per year. During the 2015 Legislative session, the legislature approved the state transportation package which increased the fuel tax refund for snowmobiles. The program continues to use the following formula: 135 gallons of fuel X the number of registered snowmobiles X $0.349. (According to statute, the fuel tax will be reviewed again in 2031) The fuel tax increase and the registration fee increase are expected to bring the snowmobile program back to an economically viable funding level.

49% Registrations 51% Fuel Tax

Snowmobile Registrations: Fiscal Year 2018 (ending June 30, 2018) – 23,221 Fiscal Year 2017 (ending June 30, 2017) - 25,239 Fiscal Year 2016 (ending June 30, 2016) – 25,148 Fiscal Year 2015 (ending June 30, 2015) - 20,179 Fiscal Year 2014 (ending June 30, 2014) - 24,689 Fiscal Year 2013 (ending June 30, 2013) - 28,329 Fiscal Year 2012 (ending June 30, 2012) - 28,426 Fiscal Year 2011 (ending June 30, 2011) - 31,406 Fiscal Year 2010 (ending June 30, 2010) - 29,704

Snowmobile Advisory Committee: During the Snowmobile Advisory Committee (SMAC) summer funding meeting the Committee recommended a total budget of $3,319,344 for FY19, which is $15,278 less than FY 18. The budget is based on six funding priorities. The Committee recommends distribution of funds following the order of priority. The following chart illustrates the budget allocations for the Program. The largest expenditure is trail grooming which encompasses 70% of the budget.

FY 18 Budget Allocations

Non-Motorized Winter Recreation Program: Winter Recreation Advisory Committee

During the Winter Recreation Advisory Committee (WRAC) summer funding meeting the Committee recommended a total budget of $1,526,721 for FY19, an increase of $76,970 since FY18. This fund balance increase represents a moderate carryover in snow removal due to the late and light snow year. The budget is based on six funding priorities. The Committee recommends distribution of funds following the order of priority. The following chart illustrates the budget allocation for the Program. The largest expenditure is trail grooming which currently encompasses 23% of the budget.

FY 18 Budget Allocations WRAC Budget 2018

Admin Equipment 18% reserve 22% Snow E&E Removal 12% 16%

Trail Grooming Sanitation 29% 3%

2018/2019 Fiscal – Northwest Avalanche Center: Recognizing the importance of the NWAC and a valuable partner to the Winter Recreation Program, each program continued their previous contributions to NWAC ($7,500 from SMAC and $6,000 from WRAC).

Review of Operations: For the 2017/2018 winter season, the Snowmobile Program contracted with public and private entities to provide sanitary facilities and snow removal services at 72 sno-parks, and trail grooming services on approximately 3,000 miles of snowmobile trails. The Non-Motorized Winter Recreation Program contracted with public and private entities to provide sanitary facilities and snow removal services at 37 sno-parks, and trail marking, grooming, and track setting on approximately 300 miles of cross-country ski, snowshoe, and dog sled trails.

Networking/Communications: The Winter Recreation Program continues to participate in State Parks’ Twitter network and Facebook. We currently have 5,424 twitter followers, and we sent out 75 tweets (messages) during the fiscal year (July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018).

Steering Committee Work: The Steering Committee did not meet during the spring of 2017. This committee will hold their next meeting in the fall of 2018. This committee is made up of 3 members from each Advisory Committee and focus on issues related to all winter recreation programs.

Sno-Park Permits: Current fee structure: Seasonal Sno Park Permit $40.00 Special Groomed Trail Sticker $40.00 Daily Sno Park Permit $20.00

PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS:

Winter Recreation Program Mascots: We are continuing our work with Washington State Parks’ Communications Team. The Winter Recreation Program two program mascots, Matilda and Blake, both Snowshoe Hares, for use in outreach and education programs. Working with the Communications Team, staff has developed materials (coloring and activity books, lapel pins and stickers) to help teach young winter recreationalists about winter safety and encouraging them to get outside and enjoy all the joys and adventures winter has to offer. Matilda and Blake are now being well represented in the new rollout of the Agency Junior Ranger Program. The Junior Ranger Program, developed and approved by the State Parks Ranger Association, was due for a “refresh”. These two mascots will become part of the larger picture of the Junior Ranger Program, helping teach children how to be good stewards of the environment, learn about wildlife, state history, safety and the many types of outdoor recreation found in Washington and within our State Parks.

Contracts: Seven contracts and agreements expired in 2018, including two snowmobile trail grooming contracts, one non-motorized trail grooming contract and four agreements with U.S. Forest Service Ranger Districts, for services such as grooming, snow removal, sanitation and education and enforcement. Staff has and will release Requests for Proposals for these expired contracts, compile bid review panels and select successful bidders. Contract has been awarded for: Colville. Bids ready to be released are for snowmobile grooming at the Ahtanum and non-motorized at Cabin Creek/Erling Stordahl. These contracts are for five years with budget availability and reviews conducted annually for winter services.

GPS: During the summer of 2017 staff prepared a Request for Proposal for a Global Positioning System (GPS). A successful bidder was chosen, and the agency entered into a 5-year lease agreement with AtlasTrax. The cost is $280 per unit per year with unlimited messaging. The cost for the 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 winters will be covered by the Winter Recreation Programs. With technology constantly evolving, leased equipment will provide the program with the most current, state-of-the-art equipment year to year. Staff deployed 50 GPS units statewide to private grooming contractors and state-owned equipment for both programs. Due to a late start, the data available for the 2017/2018 winter is only for a partial season. Installing GPS units is becoming industry standard and there are many benefits; minimizes audit risk, 44

validates grooming logs, is a tool for addressing public complaints, provides another mechanism for safety tracking of machines, and verifies assumptions regarding grooming speeds. Other advantages provide staff, grooming coordinators, landowners and contractors the ability to see near real time cat locations and track daily grooming progress. Following the 2017/2018 winter season, staff conducted an internal review comparing official grooming logs with GPS data. The review was done on only a few programs for both snowmobile and non-motorized, private contractor and public. The review concluded that although there is room for improvement the success rates were between 65 and 74 percent verifiable. Our goals for 2018/2019: GPS an entire season, implement programing updates from AtlasTrax, reach a verifiable goal of 80% (terrain, tree canopy and other factors make 100% unrealistic).

New Hires: The Winter Recreation Program is proud to announce the hiring of Corey Tolar formerly of the United States Marines and the United States Army. During Corey’s military career, he traveled the world defending our Country and sharpening his Accounting and Budgetary skills. Corey retired from the Army earlier this year and almost immediately joined us at the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission. Corey’s time is divided between the State’s Boating Program and the Winter Recreation Program. He comes to us with an extensive background and specializes in Accounting and Budgeting. Corey has navigated the complexity of the Winter Recreation Program for both non-motorized and motorized. With our dedicated funding, Corey has found our program to be quite unique compared to other State and Federal budgeting. Corey is now and will hopefully continue to be the Fiscal Analyst for Boating and Winter Recreation.

Trade Shows: Staff continues to be very active with Trade Show participation and nurturing existing partnerships and developing new ones. The Winter Recreation Program attends, on average, 5 trade shows each year and continues to be an active partner with the Manufactured Home and Recreation Vehicle Association (MHRV), the Spokane Winter Knights, the Bavarian Boondockers Snow Fest, and the Washington State Snowmobile Association.

LOOKING FORWARD:

2018 Strategic Plan: The prior Winter Recreation Program Strategic Plan was prepared by staff with vast input from users across the state and approved by the State Parks Commission in 2008. The 2008 Strategic Plan had areas within the Plan that were unachievable and outdated. With the help of winter recreation users, we have developed a new 2018-2028 plan (Appendix 1).

Contracts Expire 2019: Twelve contracts and agreements are expiring in 2019, including two trail grooming contracts, one snow removal and nine agreements with other Government partners, for services such as trail grooming, snow removal, sanitation and education and enforcement.

On-Line Snowmobile Safe Rider Course: Staff is investigating the possibility of adopting an on-line Snowmobile Safe Rider Course. Currently staff offer this course in partnership with the Chelan County Sheriff’s Office. The officers conduct one class in the Fall at the Washington State Snowmobile Associations annual Expo and Snow Show in Puyallup. Another class is held each December at the Lake Wenatchee Recreation Club. With the number of participants declining and with technology, on-line training is becoming more a popular method of learning. This method of training is currently being used in many States and Provinces across Canada. It is not anticipated that hands-on, face to face training will no longer be offered, this will merely be an additional option if staff can work out the details with the vendor.

APPENDIX 1

Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission Winter Recreation Strategic Plan 2018-2028

Don Hoch, Agency Director Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission 1111 Israel Rd. SW | PO Box 42650 | Olympia, WA 98504-2650 | http://parks.state.wa.us

“The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission acquires, operates, enhances and protects a diverse system of recreational, cultural, historical and natural sites. The Commission fosters outdoor recreation and education statewide to provide enjoyment and enrichment for all, and a valued legacy to future generations.”

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 3

Introduction and Historical Overview 5

Guiding Principles, Goals and Objectives 7

Future Trends 8

Plan Implementation 12

Upper Level Objectives, Goals and Strategies 13

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Why update the Strategic Plan?

The last major planning exercise completed by the Winter Recreation Program was in 2008. At that time, there was a high level of mistrust and skepticism related to the winter recreation programs (snowmobile and non-motorized) and the strategic planning effort was an approach to address those concerns. That Plan was met with skepticism and mistrust and yet created a glimmer of hope and optimism for change and improvement. That glimmer of hope and optimism has resulted in stronger working relationships within the Advisory Committees, and among groups, clubs, organizations and other governmental partners. Some of the notable accomplishments have been the involvement of stake holders, accountability and transparency with users, contractors, stakeholders and the Advisory Committees. The Plan itself called for regular reviews. What the Plan seeks to accomplish.

• Capturing and expressing the desires of the users and building stronger relationships with users. Clear expression of constituents’ desires for the program in the years to come. • Continue to emphasize building and maintaining strong relationships with advisory committees, volunteers and partners. • Continued emphasis on customer service and transparent management. • Provide guidance to the Program in meeting increasing recreational demands, especially in the I- 90 Corridor, and other areas exhibiting high demand. • Adopt the use of GPS and GIS technologies as Program Management tools, for purposes including tracking of trail groomers, producing data regarding grooming miles and grooming speed, and to provide accurate interactive and mobile friendly maps to the public that show all Sno-Park locations and trail routes. • Identify strategies on how to protect dedicated funds for both winter programs.

The Winter Recreation Program Mission:

The mission of the Winter Recreation Program is to provide a variety of snow-based winter recreational opportunities to the public while protecting natural and cultural resources throughout the state.

Winter Recreation Program Vision:

The Winter Recreation Program is a well-managed and respected program of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission providing effective and efficient service that: 1) is responsive to the recreational demands of the public; 2) facilitates public access to diverse snow-based recreational opportunities; 3) encourages responsible use and protection of natural and cultural resources; and 4) is closely integrated into the communities it serves through effective relationships with volunteers, federal, state and local governments and private property owners.

Culture and Core Values:

In interacting with one another, the Commission, staff, Advisory Committees, partners, supporters and volunteers, foster a collaborative culture in which people:

• Maintain a working environment to nurture innovation • Encourage exploring new opportunities and ideas and accept responsibility for outcomes • Respectfully challenge assumptions and work traditions • Give and accept constructive criticism • Accept that conflicts between ideas may be a necessary step toward finding solutions • Act with civic courage and the highest ethical standards • Take pride in the work, mission and vision of the Program

The Winter Recreation Program staff, Advisory Committees, partners, supporters and volunteers share core values that demonstrate a commitment to:

• Providing access to recreational and educational opportunities statewide; • Meaningful public engagement and participation in developing and operating the Winter Recreation Program • Supporting one another by working together to achieve the Program’s mission • Quality and value in all work accomplished

Who are we and what do we do

The Washington State Parks Winter Recreation Program has 123 sno-parks on public land and approximately 3,300 miles of groomed trails. Washington offers users a destination for winter activities. Washington’s winter program is unique in comparison to other states in that Washington’s Winter Program manages winter recreation for snowmobilers and non-motorized recreationists on a statewide basis. Other states may have separate programs or even separate agencies managing the two different programs.

Washington’s winter program is guided by two Advisory Committees consisting of citizens from around the state, appointed by the State Parks Director to serve staggered, three-year terms. The Advisory Committees help establish operating procedures for the program and provide advice regarding budgeting of dedicated funds and policy guidance for program activities

Washington State Parks’ Winter Program has expertise in providing opportunities for winter recreation, including cross-country skiing, snowshoeing, snow play, and skijoring, dog- sledding, fat tire bicycling and snowmobiling.

Introduction and Historical Overview

In the state of Washington, a variety of highland areas, including the Cascade, Blue and Selkirk mountain ranges, and the Okanogan Highlands, offer winter snow conditions that are conducive to a variety of recreational activities, including cross-country skiing, snowshoeing, snowmobiling, sledding, tubing, skijoring, dog-sledding, fat tire bicycling, and general snow-play. Although nature has provided the climate and the terrain, gaining access to locations where the public can engage in these recreational opportunities has become the charge of a variety of government agencies assisted by a host of dedicated volunteers and associations. Coordination of government efforts to provide the bulk of snow-based recreational access has coalesced under the administration of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission (also referred to in this document as either the Commission or State Parks).

The development of State Parks’ initial winter recreation program evolved over a period of about ten years. In 1966, the Commission allowed motorized snow vehicles in designated areas of Lake Wenatchee, Mount Spokane, and Pearrygin Lake State Parks on a one-year trial basis. This authorization was continued in 1967 and also expanded to include specified areas in Alta Lake, Brooks Memorial, Fields Spring, Lake Wenatchee, and Riverside State Parks.

In February of 1970, the Commission, aided by the volunteer efforts of an ad hoc task force, initiated a project to define the problems and areas of concerns created by snowmobile use. The report investigated nine primary aspects of snowmobiling: the industry; users; recreational and environmental effects; safety; facilities; regulations; enforcement; legislation; and financing. The resulting report was entitled “Snowmobiling in Washington State” dated November 1970, and served as the basis of the Washington State Snowmobile Act of 1971.

The Commission implemented the Snowmobile Act by entering into agreements with other agencies, organizations and individuals to remove snow from parking areas; and to certify volunteer instructors to provide safety training classes. A staff position of Snowmobile Coordinator was also established and the distribution of brochures containing snowmobile regulations commenced.

Legislative action requested by cross-country skiers in 1975 established the Winter Recreation Parking (Sno-Park) Permit program. Like the snowmobile legislation, this program was designed to provide fee- based services primarily to cross-country skiers.

A third body of Winter Recreation related legislation gave State Parks the responsibility for the Downhill Ski Lift Safety Inspection Program. This program and the Commission’s management of downhill skiing facilities are not included in this Strategic Plan.

The Sno-Park Program implemented in 1975 became the core of State Parks’ new Winter Recreation Program, now consisting of two administrative components, the snowmobile program and the non-motorized program, with separate funds supporting the cost of each program. The snowmobile program is funded from snowmobile registration fees and a percentage of the state gasoline tax. The non-motorized program is funded by the proceeds from Sno-Park parking permit fees. It is important to note for any proposed future changes in funding structures, that both programs were

established by the Legislature to be financially self-supporting, using dedicated fund sources, without significant additional support from the Parks Commission. Changing the current funding model would require the concurrence of the Governor’s Office and the Legislature.

Two citizen advisory committees were also established to advise State Parks in the administration of the Winter Recreation Program, and include the Winter Recreation (Sno-Park) Advisory Committee (pertaining to non-motorized uses), and the Snowmobile Advisory Committee.

In 1992, the Commission prepared a Winter Recreation Program Plan that was the first comprehensive review of State Parks’ involvement in the provision of winter recreation access. It included an extensive history, a program description, an assessment of user demand, and a discussion of future directions. In 2008, the Commission completed and adopted the Winter Recreation Program Strategic Plan.

The August 2012 State of State Parks report and the March 2013 Transformation Strategy provide context and background for the agency’s strategic direction over the subsequent six years. Those documents and other support materials, including public involvement efforts, can be found on the agency website at: http://parks.state.wa.us/149/Strategic-Plan. Clear descriptions of the agency’s Mission, Vision, Culture and Core Values and a comprehensive set of strategies and initiatives have emerged from those documents. Strategies are geared toward meaningful changes, and the creation of a successful, sustainable foundation. Additionally, the mission, vision and core values will ensure that quality, public trust and confidence are maintained. The winter recreation strategic plan is consistent with and supportive of the Agency’s Strategic Plan.

The need for an updated Winter Recreation Strategic Plan has been demonstrated by continually changing conditions over the past several years, including: • Funding continues to be outpaced by recreational demand in some locations, and the costs of providing services are increasing. • Sno-Parks in some areas are becoming overcrowded, with vehicles turned away on busy weekends, primarily in the non-motorized recreation areas. • New forms of snow-based recreation are being introduced, including fat tire bicycles, snow bike snowmobiles, and other over-the-snow vehicles. • Large variations in winter weather and snowpack in the mountains. • Availability of management resources

Over the more than 40 year lifespan of the Winter Recreation Program, the program has experienced ebb and flow when it comes to growth, and now includes 123 Sno-Parks statewide. Approximately 81 of these Sno-Parks are used primarily for snowmobile trail access, with another 42 provided exclusively for Non-motorized trail access. A number of these Sno-Parks are shared by both the motorized and non- motorized programs. Associated with these Sno-Parks are approximately 3,300 miles of groomed trails, (snowmobile and non-motorized combined) that are provided and maintained in cooperation with federal, state, county and local agencies, snowmobile clubs and private landowners. State Parks has also designated five snow-play areas that are serviced by Sno-Parks, providing opportunities for tubing and other snow-based recreational activities. The dramatic increase in recreational demand since inception of the program has necessitated an evolving management response to ensure that parking lots are constructed, maintained and plowed, restrooms provided, trails maintained and groomed, signs posted, rules enforced, equipment purchased, safety training provided, conflicts resolved, and visitors kept informed; and all within the available financial resources provided by current funding mechanisms. 52

Guiding Principles, Goals and Objectives

Guiding Principles:

In fulfilling the mission and vision statements, guiding principles are helpful in the development of program goals and objectives, and the strategies to accomplish them. The following guiding principles were adopted by the Commission in 2008 and should continue. The Winter Recreation Program will:

1. Actively involve people in decisions that affect them; help people to participate by providing them with credible, timely, and objective information; and, develop programs with a clear understanding of public expectations for Program services. 2. Advocate for responsible management and for equitable allocation of resources. 3. Create and strengthen cooperative relationships with individuals, organized groups, local governments, and state and federal resource management agencies. 4. Manage programs in a consistent manner, and use innovation and technology to improve services. Safety is a priority and will always be considered in our planning and actions. 5. Be receptive to, and consider advice from all organizations and individuals relating to winter recreation programs, and not limit topics to only those identified by staff. 6. Be more clearly integrated as a program of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission. 7. Demonstrate a cooperative, mutually supportive working atmosphere for staff, volunteers, and partners. 8. Commit to stewardship that transmits high quality park and recreation assets to future generations. 9. Pursue dedication to outdoor recreation and public enjoyment that welcomes all our citizens to their public lands. 10. Strive for excellence in all we do. 11. Involve the public in our policy development and decision making. 12. Support one another as we translate our mission into reality.

Upper Level Objectives and Supplementary Goals:

1. Access to snow-based recreation will be our primary product. • Recreational access opportunities are responsive to user demands while reflecting sensitive environmental stewardship.

2. The Program has viable planning functions. • There is adequate separation of incompatible or conflicting recreational uses. • Well maintained, clearly signed and usable parking areas and trails, accurate maps. • Effective, safe trail grooming is provided.

3 We will build enduring partnerships. • A vigorous, organized, skilled, and respected volunteer program, i.e., advisory committee members, grooming councils, grooming coordinators, associations and clubs. • Viable Advisory Committees that are regarded as full partners.

4. We will maintain open and responsive communications with the public. • Safety, education and resource stewardship are high priorities. • We provide accurate and up to date information to the public. • We respond to complaints and disputes in a timely and sensitive manner. • We strive to improve technology-based communication, i.e. mobile friendly maps and GPS tracking.

5. We will exercise transparent decision-making, with clear, understandable, and concisely written procedures, practices, grants and contracts. • We actively involve people in decisions that affect them, and help people participate by providing them with credible, timely and objective information. • We employ effective contract management principles and techniques, and maintain high standards of financial accountability and management effectiveness, including responsive budgeting and clear financial reporting.

6. We manage public resources in a consistent and responsible manner. • Winter Recreation services are adequately and equitably funded. • We plan ahead to compensate for variables that affect service delivery.

Future Trends

As explained above, the Winter Recreation Program continues to evolve since its inception nearly 40 years ago. Most of the growth has occurred in the non-motorized program with some variability dependent on snow conditions. Attendance data, although limited and based on vehicles rather than individuals, is collected through the sale of sno-park permits and snowmobile registrations. Some general information has also been provided by the Washington State Recreation Conservation Office (RCO).

The assessment of the supply of outdoor recreation facilities and opportunities in Washington suggests that the supply of recreation is not completely meeting public demand, and meeting that demand is further challenged by the pressure of population growth and urbanization in Washington.

An assessment of outdoor winter recreation in Washington in 2015 estimated that there are: • 231,443 cross country skiers, 344,593 snowshoers, and 123,436 OSV (over the snow vehicles) • Overall growth between 2002 and 2013 shows a 105% increase in cross country skiing, 807% increase in snowshoeing and a 26% increase in OSV use with 31.3 percent of Washingtonians participating in general winter recreational activities. On average, Washingtonians spend 56 days per year recreating outdoors. Note: Snowmobile data alone does not support this level of growth. (1)

Snow Play: There has been significant growth in general snow play activities, as demonstrated by the popularity of State Parks’ designated Sno-Play areas and the addition of tubing hills at ski resorts. Included within this category are those visitors seeking to enjoy just being in the snow, some perhaps experiencing snow for the first time.

Miscellaneous: Other winter recreation activities that have grown considerably include dog-sledding, skijoring (a skier towed by one or more dogs), fat tire bicycling, snowshoeing, snow hiking (without snowshoes, often early or late in the season when snow depths are reduced), ice climbing, snow bikes (a hybrid between a motorcycle and a snowmobile), and snow camping.

The Outdoor Recreation Participation Study of 2005 concluded that activities which meet the following characteristics will have broader appeal. (2) • Easy access • Easy to learn • Done in a day • Less specialized technical gear required

CLIMATE CHANGE:

“Preparing Washington State Parks for Climate Change” A Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment for Washington State Parks” June 2017. Prepared by The University of Washington Climate Impacts Group in partnership with Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission. (Excerpts related to winter recreation from the recent Washington State Parks Climate Assessment)

Our Snowpack Defined:

Changes in snowpack: The Washington Cascades and Olympic Mountains contain the highest fraction of “warm snow”, or snow falling within a few degrees of freezing (32 degrees F). Shorter Winter Season and Warming Temperatures: Warming seasonal temperatures also contribute to a shorter snow season overall. Warmer fall temperatures delay the start of accumulation in the fall while warmer spring temperatures contribute to earlier spring snowmelt. Snow season length in Washington State is projected to shorten by -33 days on average (range: -45 to -21 days) and -55 days (range: -68 to -39 days) on average by the 2050s and 2080s, respectively, under a high greenhouse gas scenario 9RCP 8.5)²¹ As with snowpack, natural variability will continue to produce above average and below average conditions on a year-to-year basis. However, what is considered above average and below average will be redefined over time as the long-term effects of warming winter temperatures are realized.

The Projected Change in snow season length for a low greenhouse gas scenario (RCP 4.5) is -25 days (range: -31 to -18) for the 2050s and -35 days (range: -46 to -24 days) for the 2080s, relative to 1970-99.

Challenges: Staff noted that managing the Winter Recreation Program is becoming more challenging as winter snowpack and access to Sno-Parks becomes more variable and as population growth creates more demand. These factors create what staff considered a “double whammy” for the program. Declining snowpack and a shorter snow season are likely to lead to a drop in Sno-Park permit purchases and snowmobile registrations over time. Lower sales would affect annual revenue for the Winter Recreation Program and may reduce emergency budget reserves, leaving the program more vulnerable to year-to- year variability in snowpack and funding. Staff noted that revenue during the snow drought of 2014-2015 declined 30%. Because the Winter Recreation Program is self-funded with an operating budget based on the previous season’s revenue, variability in snowpack and snow quality can create both challenges and opportunities for the program. For example, if a low snowpack year is followed by a high snowpack year, operating expenses for plowing and trail grooming may exceed available budget. Plowing costs for years with more rain-on-snow events can also be higher than budgeted, since rain-on-snow makes snow heavier and more difficult to clear and groom. Winter Recreation may have to stop plowing some locations before the season ends, limiting access to affected Sno-Parks or leading to pre-season closures. In other cases, funds may be pulled from budgets for equipment replacement/repair to maintain access. On the positive side, high snowpack years create an opportunity to place extra funds in an emergency reserve.

Adapting to Future Challenges: Winter Recreation staff noted that adapting program operations to decreasing snowpack may require moving Sno-Park access points (e.g., parking lots) to higher elevations. This kind of shift would create several challenges. First, moving Sno-Parks may require accessing existing or building new roads at a time when the US Forest Service is focusing more on decommissioning roads. Second, moving Sno-Parks to higher elevation will reduce usable trail miles. Staff estimated that moving the system up in elevation could shrink the amount of usable trail miles from 3,300 miles to 1,500 miles. Moving to higher elevation would also push more trail users into avalanche territory, increasing safety risks.

For a full report contact the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission.

Program Funding: It is difficult to make accurate financial predictions in a program that is dependent on the weather, fuel costs, and user participation. All of these factors impact the number of sno-park permits that are sold and the number of snowmobiles that are registered. With the work of the Washington State Snowmobile Association and the Washington State Legislature, snowmobile registrations and fuel tax refunds have been increased over the past 3 years which has resulted in a positive impact on the snowmobile program’s funding.

Despite the uncertainty, the Non-Motorized Program has experienced some financial stability with fee increases in 2009, and the elimination of reciprocity with neighboring states in 2010. The program is striving to meet increasing demands over the past decade, and is working to maintain current service levels. Opportunities to provide program expansion and growth will depend upon the ability to sustain funding levels. When contemplating the future, a prudent course of action may be to determine what service level can be sustained and budget accordingly, and examine the demands put on the Sno-Park system.

ISSUES IN PROVIDING RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES – According to SCORP:

 Among local providers, three issues repeatedly emerged as the most important: funding, maintenance of existing facilities, and problems related to access.  Among federal, state, and not-for-profit recreation providers, public access is by far the top issue of concern.  Among all providers, creating new partnership opportunities and increasing public access are priorities.  User conflicts and recreation compatibility are key issues of concern to providing quality outdoor recreation experiences to user groups. User conflicts can have serious consequences, including safety issues, user displacement, and even participation desertion.  There are three trends that may pose challenges to outdoor recreation providers in the future: increasing demand for outdoor recreation due to population growth, increasing diversity of recreation experiences, and the contemporary retraction of government programs (e.g., anti-tax initiatives in Washington). An additional factor is that the Legislature did away with the Tourism promotion agency board. Washington is the only state that does not have an active agency to promote state tourism. (4)

(1) Estimates of Future Participation in Outdoor Recreation in Washington State. A Report by the Washington Recreation Conservation Office (RCO) 2015 (2) Outdoor Recreation Participation Study, 8th Edition. Washington State Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC), 2005 (3) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2014. (4) The 2013 State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) – Recreation and Conservation Office

Plan Implementation

The plan includes an expansive list of strategies to accomplish its goals. There is certainly no expectation that the Program could or should be obligated to implement each and every one of these strategies during the next ten years. However, the list should be viewed as a menu of different opportunities that can be actively pursued. It is likely that, during plan implementation, other strategies will be discovered that are not currently included in this edition of the plan.

The following is a discussion of the most important aspects to be considered in implementing the Strategic Plan.

Relationships and Volunteer support are truly essential components of the Winter Recreation Program, so efforts to strengthen existing and develop new relationships with advisory committees, individual and group volunteers should continue, especially with local grooming councils and coordinators.

The roles and responsibilities of staff, Advisory Committees and volunteers have been clarified and education provided. This education continues with the dissemination of operating procedures given to each new Advisory Committee member and Grooming Coordinator.

The two existing advisory committees have established a Steering Committee made up of each Chair, Vice Chair and one additional member of the opposite committee. The combination of representatives of each committee into a unified Winter Recreation Steering Committee has led to the development of Operating Procedures and Program Policy.

Written operating procedures provide a vehicle for process improvement throughout the life of the Program. Procedures reflecting current and best practices have been prepared by the Steering Committee and Program staff, and shared for review, and approval, by the Advisory Committees. These Operating Procedures should be revisited on a regular basis to ensure that they reflect the latest thinking. Additional and/or modified administrative code may also be a necessary step in administration of the program.

Equitable and adequate funding will be a necessity to enable the Winter Recreation Program to respond to future growth in recreational demand. Increased funding for non-motorized recreational uses should be revaluated over the next ten years. An attempt to simplify sno-park permit options should be explored while maintaining adequate and dedicated levels of funding. The motorized and non-motorized funds should remain separate. Motorized funds cannot legally be re-directed for non-motorized purposes, and the plan does not advise combining the funds.

The Winter Recreation Program has become more visible and better integrated as a regular program of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission. Being recognized as a viable program within the agency has benefited our partners and users due to the assistance that is now being obtained from other agency programs and supporting services.

The goals of securing recreational access and separating incompatible uses should be pursued concurrently by means of viable planning functions. Area-specific plans would identify where access is needed, where Sno-Parks should be established or removed, where “snow-play” and trail systems should be developed or altered, and how to satisfy the recreational demands of a given area of the state. The

local area plans would then become the seedbed for germination of project applications that are submitted to the Advisory Committees for funding decisions.

Safety, education and resource stewardship should be enhanced throughout the state, with a better law enforcement presence at Sno-Parks and increased on-trail enforcement. Earlier winter season enforcement presence has proven to be an effective tool for education and rule compliance. Law enforcement at Sno-Parks and on trails is now accomplished by a broad coalition of agencies including State Parks, the U.S. Forest Service, State Fish & Wildlife, the Department of Natural Resources, local county Sheriff’s offices, and sometimes the State Patrol. Establishing more rules and regulations for the use of Sno-Parks and trails without the ability to enforce them would not be productive.

Information provided to the Public regarding trail and snow conditions must be accurate and timely, especially for weekends and holidays. This could be accomplished by more aggressive management of the Winter Recreation website and by providing links to the websites of other state agencies, non-profit organizations including the Washington State Snowmobile Association, local Nordic clubs, and local Chambers of Commerce. GPS trackers on grooming machines will also provide more up-to-date information and accountability. Providing information that is not accurate or up-to-date generates visitor complaints and is detrimental to public perception of the program and agency.

The remaining goals and strategies regarding signs, trails and parking areas, grooming, contract management, financial accountability, management effectiveness, and responding to complaints and disputes are all self-explanatory.

Overall, elements of the plan should be prioritized and reflected in operating procedures and work of the advisory committees and staff to ensure they are carried out in an orderly manner. Over the life of this Strategic Plan there should be a growing emphasis on local input regarding the location and manner of providing snow-based recreational services, recognizing the need to maintain a distinct identity for the Program, and striving for consistent high quality services that equitably represent the interests of the recreating public.

Upper Level Objectives, Goals and Strategies

The following are proposed upper level objectives, supporting goals, and some suggested strategies for attaining them. Those strategies in bold type are suggested priorities. Strategies followed by a dollar sign ($) indicate that additional funding will be necessary to implement the strategy.

Upper Level Objective 1. Access to snow-based recreation will be our primary product.

GOAL:

1. Recreational access opportunities are responsive to user demands, while reflecting sensitive environmental stewardship.

STRATEGIES:

A. Plan for or relocate more Sno-Parks, if trail system has the capacity to handle increased usage; and seek opportunities to expand trail systems to meet the needs of current and future populations, including non-groomed trail routes into backcountry areas ($). B. Identify a list of desirable trailheads that currently do not have winter access, but have future potential for back country access. C. Develop opportunities to provide “snowplay” areas, including sledding and tubing runs. D. Pursue adequate plowed access to off-trail recreational activities, such as snowshoeing, climbing, backcountry camping, sledding and general snow-play ($). E. Actively participate in land use planning processes carried out by various land management agencies to advocate for recreational access, and participate in annual meetings with land-owners OSV travel would be of particular interest for snowmobilers and motorbikes with conversion kits... F. Investigate the need for more “doggy” trails, skijoring and dog-sledding opportunities. G. Explore new opportunities for overnight lodging (cabins and yurts) and warming huts at Sno- Park areas and back-country areas accessed by trail ($). H. Pursue permanent easements or long-term agreements for trail routes across public and private lands ($). I. Improve definitions of roles and responsibilities of land owners and user groups. J. Establish fat tire bike designated trail locations and use guidelines.

GOAL:

2. The Program has viable planning functions.

STRATEGIES:

A. Plan and develop future facilities and services will be responsive to user needs and concerns, will assess and address environmental impacts, safety concerns, overcrowding and user conflicts; and will involve stakeholders and the Advisory Committees. B. Encourage local stakeholders and volunteers to assist State Parks in developing area- specific plans that are guided by, consistent with, and help implement the Strategic Plan. As part of this, plan criteria needs to be developed and existing Sno-Parks evaluated. C. Analyze the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) data on the number of motorized and non-motorized users in the state in a cooperative effort with outdoor equipment retailers and other public agencies. D. Continue to survey users and land owners on a regular basis to identify present and future needs and provide feedback, including demographics or economic impacts. Consider surveying people coming off trail, regarding the services provided (snow removal, sanitary conditions, trail head and trail signing, trail surface, etc). ($) E. Explore opportunities for more Sno-Parks and comprehensive trail systems that are easily accessed from population centers, to decrease drive times and help alleviate congestion at existing sites. F. Planning and development of future Sno-Parks and “Sno-Park Zones”, and trails, will consider reliability of snow cover, higher elevation access points to parking and potential links to other attractions and amenities, including national, state and local parks, historic sites, scenic views, and private lodging and food services. G. Utilize the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) and input from other governmental organizations (such as the U.S. 60

Forest Service and counties) in the planning of facilities and services specific to non-motorized use. H. Promote recreation activities that enhance health and fitness. I. Move towards a more streamlined sno-park permit system requirement and remove the need for a discover pass with a one-day sno-park permit on state owned land.

GOAL:

3. There is adequate separation of incompatible or conflicting recreational uses.

STRATEGIES:

A. Sno-Park areas should serve dedicated trail systems when possible to meet the needs of a variety of incompatible or conflicting uses.

B. Separate “snow-play” areas should be provided. C. Educate recreational users about the needs and desires of the various users. D. Where conflicts develop, manage uses more intensely, and consider alternating uses by time or space as a means to avoid conflicts. E. Consider using Sno-Park hosts or other volunteers to provide on-site education concerning rules, regulations and trail etiquette. F. Target enforcement efforts in response to incident reports and complaints ($). G. Continue to closely examine what other states and provinces are doing to mitigate use conflicts, i.e., Fat Tire Bicycles on snowmobile trails and/or groomed ski trails, side-by-sides and other over the snow vehicles (OSV) on winter trails.

GOAL:

4. Well maintained, clearly signed and usable parking areas and trails, with accurate maps.

STRATEGIES:

A. Snow removal should be a first priority for funding and contracting so that users can expect the parking lots to be plowed. B. Signing should be provided to clearly designate trails dedicated to certain uses, i.e. “Snowshoe only”, “Skijoring only”, “Dogs not permitted on Trail”, etc. and to let people know where they are, and where access is prohibited. C. Install more restrooms where needed, and provide ADA compliant restrooms, where practical. ($) D. Pursue opportunities to expand trail route identification and selection with volunteers, local clubs and organizations. E. Review and enhance directional signing from highways and roads to parking areas and trailheads.

GOAL:

5. Effective, safe trail grooming is provided.

STRATEGIES:

A. Implement “condition-responsive” grooming as opposed to “fixed-schedule” grooming, and provide flexibility for grooming schedules to address local conditions. B. Apply cost-benefit and feasibility analyses when determining how to provide grooming services in any given area, considering private businesses, non-profit organizations, other agencies, or State Parks’ staff and equipment. C. Analyze the need for additional groomed trail routes where necessary to reduce crowding, and improve trail safety and quality. D. The need and identification of ungroomed or intermittently groomed trails should be evaluated and communicated to the users. E. Implementing GPS technology to validate grooming data and provide 24/7 sno-cat location ability for emergencies and breakdown assistance. F. Lease GPS equipment and implement equipment tracking safety system.

Upper Level Objective 2. We will build enduring partnerships.

GOAL:

1. A vigorous, organized and respected volunteer program.

STRATEGIES: 62

A. Accurately define the roles and responsibilities of volunteers, and provide related orientation and training. B. Increase the use of individual and group volunteers to carry out certain components of the program, such as monitoring, periodic evaluations, scheduling, and day-to-day operations. C. Train volunteers that can be contacted on-site by users to supplement State Parks’ staff and troubleshoot issues needing attention, help with user surveys, register complaints, and do car and people counts.

GOAL:

2. Viable Advisory Committees, Associations, Councils, Clubs and Organizations that are regarded as cooperative partners.

STRATEGIES:

A. Accurately define the roles and responsibilities of advisory committee members, grooming councils, etc., and provide related orientation and training, when appropriate. B. Give advisory committees, associations, councils, etc., meaningful involvement in creating operating procedures, policies and management of the program, and not relegate them to menial tasks only. C. Seek assistance and leadership from these partnerships in advocating for programs priorities, funding and growth.

Upper Level Objective 3. We will maintain open and responsive communications with the public.

GOAL:

1. Safety, education and resource stewardship are high priorities.

STRATEGIES:

A. Upgrade security at Sno-Park areas, and improve enforcement on trails in those areas that have experienced user conflicts ($). B. Explore and implement online snowmobile and general winter recreation safety programs and certifications. C. Advisory Committees should make the allocation of a pre-determined percentage of each fund for enforcement of rules at Sno-Parks and on trail systems a priority. D. Staff and volunteers to receive avalanche awareness and safety training, with more certified instructors ($). E. Work with land managing agencies and other local agencies to provide on-the-ground education/enforcement.

F. Provide a strong emphasis on education and interpretation regarding the preservation of wildlife habitat and environmentally sensitive areas, and low-impact recreation. G. Conduct emphasis programs on respecting property rights of others; including trespass issues, wilderness encroachment, noise and pollution.

GOAL:

2. We provide accurate and timely information to the public.

STRATEGIES:

A. Utilize a variety of delivery methodologies; social media, websites and links, including those maintained by State Parks, Outdoor Clubs, Chambers of Commerce, WSSA, CCWRC, and regular news releases about Winter Recreation Program functions, activities and projects. B. Provide consistent and periodic updated information on trail conditions and status on the Winter Recreation website, or on linked websites. C. Publish and distribute updated Winter Recreation publications, including maps and brochures showing the locations of recreational opportunities (including groomed and ungroomed trails) and explaining program funding mechanisms. D. Enlist volunteer assistance with update or redesign of maps, brochures and other publications. E. Do a pre-season press kit to newspapers about the Winter Recreation program. F. Participate in trade shows, and submit articles to trade magazines. G. Research on-line interactive web based mapping technology, integrated with GPS equipment to provide the public with near real-time “groomed trail maps”.

GOAL:

3. We respond to complaints and disputes in a timely and sensitive manner.

STRATEGIES:

A. Review the procedure for resolving disputes and conflicts between grooming councils and contractors, and among user groups. B. Review the procedure for thoroughly investigating and responding to complaints in a timely manner.

Upper Level Objective 4. We will exercise transparent decision-making, with clear, understandable, and concisely written contracts, procedures and practices, grants and contracts.

GOAL:

1. We actively involve people in decisions that affect them, and help people participate by providing them with credible, timely and objective information.

STRATEGIES:

A. In consultation with the Advisory Committees and stakeholder groups, staff will develop and write policies, procedures and operational guidelines to direct program administrative functions. B. New administrative codes (WACs) should be developed that regulate program activities, as necessary. B. Policies, procedures and guidelines will be reviewed at regular intervals, and modified as necessary. C. Operating guidelines are approved by the Chairs of Advisory Committees.

GOAL:

2. We employ effective contract management principles and techniques, and maintain high standards of financial accountability and management effectiveness, including responsive budgeting and clear financial reporting.

STRATEGIES:

A. Streamline and modernize application and contracting processes to reduce administrative workload for staff and applicants. B. Ensure congruity between grant applications and the contracts. C. Provide timely and detailed budget information and fund status to Advisory Committees and others. D. Modernize accountability regarding annual revenues, grant funds received, funds realized from sale of excess equipment and management of state-owned property. E. Provide agendas for Advisory Committee meetings at least one week before meetings, and disseminate Advisory Committee minutes within one month following meetings. F. Program staff should receive training targeted to enhance management effectiveness ($). G. Evaluate the program’s management and divisional reporting structure and identify administrative efficiencies and inefficiencies and effectiveness. This should include a determination if the program needs additional staff to maintain or enhance service levels, and if funding support is available.

Upper Level Objective 5. We manage public resources in a consistent and responsible manner.

GOAL:

1. Winter Recreation services are adequately and equitably funded.

STRATEGIES:

A. Advocate for regional or state-wide organizations (comparable to the Washington State Snowmobile Association) that gives voice to non-motorized recreational users, to coordinate legislative relations. Consider approaching the Washington Trails Association and other similar organizations with this idea. B. Funds collected from Commercial Use permittees and Concessionaires that use Sno-Park areas should be directed into the Winter Recreation Program budget. 65

C. Higher Sno-Park permit fees for private charter buses and vehicles with larger capacities, or requiring larger parking spaces, should be explored. D. Applications for funding will give preference to applications that show local volunteer and stakeholder support, and/or that involve multiple funding partners, and how projects link to local and regional systems and local economic interests. E. Applications to the Advisory Committees for funding should be consistent with the Strategic Plan and any local or regional plans that are subsequently developed. F. Scoring of funding applications by each Advisory Committee should consider the impacts of the projects on other users, and there should be coordination in project funding between the Advisory Committees, when appropriate. G. Evaluate state ownership of grooming equipment by tracking the full ownership cost of the state-owned equipment. H. Ensure efficient and effective use of established Accounts (Snowmobile and Non-Motorized), keeping administrative costs at appropriate levels. I. Explore ways to ensure that all snowmobiles are registered. J. Continue to seek grants and funds from other sources such as the Recreation Trails Program.

GOAL:

2. We plan ahead to compensate for variables that affect service delivery.

STRATEGIES:

A. Establish snowmobile and non-motorized emergency funds that can be used to supplement program expenses and provide flexibility in years when snow is abundant and the season can be extended. B. Develop criteria to determine funding and funding levels based on length of snow season, consistent snow cover, higher altitudes, visitor use, and explore varying season start and end dates based on local conditions. C. Develop criteria for consideration when reducing services or early closures of underutilized Sno-Parks to ensure adequate funding for the remainder of the season.

Approved and Adopted:

G. Mike Sternback, Assistant Director Date Operations Division Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission

APPENDIX 2

WINTER RECREATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Gail Garman Lyn Alderson Trond Liaboe 8710 Oertel Drive 3310 Burch Mountain Road 1699 N Wolfe Penn Ct. Blaine, WA 98230 Wenatchee, Washington 98801 Liberty Lake WA 99019 [email protected] AREA 2 509-385-1722 AREA 1 AREA 3

Ken Guza John Baranowski, Chair Kellen Springer 1320 Evergreen Park Dr. SW #11 107 Selah Ridge Road 730 Redwood Lane Olympia, WA 98502 Selah, WA 98942 Richland, WA 99354 (360) 754-7371 AREA 5 (435) 760-9217 AREA 4 AREA 6

Jim Freeman Bob Seelye, Vice Chair Tim Penelerick 3511 S. Woodward Rd Spokane 8609 Upper Peoh Point Road PO Box 961 Valley, WA 99206 Cle Elum, Washington 98922 Roslyn, WA 98941 (509) 993-4853 MOTORIZED (509) 649-2686 MOTORIZED MOTORIZED

Dept. of Natural Resources Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Association of Counties Tim Stapleton Webster Bergford Laura Osiadacz MS 47014 600 Capitol Way N 205 W 5th Ave Ste 108 Olympia, WA 98504 Olympia, WA 98501 Ellensburg, WA 98926-2887 (360) 902-1047 (360) 902-2408 (509) 962-7508 [email protected]

SNOWMOBILE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Mike Couch, Vice Chair Bob Henrie Vacant P.O. Box 1371 640 Broadway St Norris Boyd Lyman, WA 98263 P.O. Box 316 42 Fries Lane (360) 708-1400 Conconully, WA 98819 Newport, WA 99156 [email protected] (509) 322-2323 (509) 9705304 AREA 1 AREA 2 [email protected] AREA 3

Kurt Millard Devin Dekker, Chair Glenn Warren (Until replaced) 349 Butte Hill Rd 7660 North Fork Road 442 Bundy Hollow Woodland, WA 98674 Yakima, WA 98903 Dayton, WA 99328 (360) 430-9200 (509) 945-1741 (509) 582-3008 [email protected] AREA 5 [email protected] AREA 4 AREA 6

Ray Thygesen Cindy Hoover Michael Johnston P.O. Box 423 6517 Francis Ave N 50 Nelson Creek Road 39 Little Mountain Road Seattle, WA 98103 Cle Elum, WA 98922 Trout Lake, Washington [email protected] (425) 466-4993 98650 NON-MOTORIZED [email protected] NON-MOTORIZED NON-MOTORIZED

Dept. of Natural Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Association of Counties Resources Enforcement Officer Laura Osiadacz Statewide Recreation Severin Erickson Kittitas County Commissioner, District #2 Kirk Thomas 2315 N. Discovery Place 205 W 5th Ave Ste. 108 PO Box 47014 Spokane Valley, WA 99215 Ellensburg, WA 98926-2887 Olympia, WA 98504- (360) 333-7841 (509) 962-7508 7014 [email protected] [email protected] (360) 902-1047