News and Views from the Desert Protective Council.

California State Parks Still in Danger of Closure

July 1st, 2009 Posted by Chris Clarke in Public Lands, off-road vehicles

While the California legislature works this week to find alternative sources of funding for our irreplaceable state parks, there is a significant source of funds they should be urged to tap: the OHV Trust Fund. The state’s Off-Highway Vehicle Division insists on spending the entire Trust Fund on promoting and maintaining ORV opportunity but by law about $50 million dollars of the fund should go toward maintaining non-motorized recreation resources.

Please take a couple of minutes right now to call :

California Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg: Phone: (916) 651-4006
California Speaker of the Assembly Karen Bass: Phone: (916) 319-2047

and ask them to appropriate this funding from the OHV Trust Fund and put it toward State Park Funding as intended by California Senate Bill SB 742.

    Background for the call:

  • All Californians who use vehicles off the pavement have a portion of their fuel sales taxes paid into the OHV fund.
  • Fees from “Green Sticker” (non-street legal vehicles) registration account for only 12% of the OHV Trust Fund.
  • The OHV Division uses these funds exclusively to support green-sticker activities. This is a violation of state law, which says: “The department shall support both motorized and nonmotorized recreation related to off-highway vehicle use.”
  • More than four fifths of off-highway vehicle use has nothing to do with green-sticker activities. Most off-highway vehicle use in California involves street-legal driving on dirt roads, either for pleasure or to get to a destination for non-motorized recreation.
  • The California Legislature should make the OHV Division abide by the law of the land. $49.8 million in OHV funds has been paid by street-legal vehicle users engaging in non-green-sticker activities. That money should be reallocated to the Department of Parks and Recreation, in accordance with California law, to support the full range of recreational activities.
  • Non-street-legal vehicles are used by fewer than 1 in 16 California households. California’s non-OHV parks and public lands are available for all Californians to use. Those parks should get the bulk of the tax dollars derived from recreational driving, not the facilities closed to all but the select few who own green-sticker vehicles.

If you have questions or comments please call or email Terry Weiner of the Desert Protective Council ((619) 342-5524.)

  1. 8 Responses to “California State Parks Still in Danger of Closure”

  2. By John on Jul 3, 2009

    Hey Guys,

    Raise your own money from fund raisers or such. Please don’t steal the money the off-road enthusiasts paid into the dedicated fund.

    We are not your enemy! We both enjoy use and stewardship of the natural resources.

    thanks,

    John

  3. By Chris Clarke on Jul 3, 2009

    Howdy John;

    If you read the bullet points above more carefully, you’ll see that it’s actually the other way around: four fifths of the money in the OHV Trust Fund is paid by non-green sticker folks. We’re only asking that the OHV Division stop siphoning money from the rest of us to subsidize the expensive hobby of a small minority.

  4. By John on Jul 3, 2009

    Hi Chris,

    Thanks for your points.

    But the trust is funded by: collection of the fuel tax, registration fees for off-highway vehicles, and entrance fees at the SVRAs.

    The fuel tax is from gas purchases from OFF ROAD vehicles – not those driven on the road. So, we are self-funding and not siphoning anything.

    See the link – it details a previous theft of OHV funds for state parks, that had no OHV facilities.

    http://www.bsa.ca.gov/reports/summary/2004-126

    The bullets you cite above do indeed need to be reviewed carefully; as they twist the facts of the case. For example, the second bullet makes it sound like we only contribute 12% of the trust. But look at the first bullet and note – “off the pavement.” That’s us, not you.

    Again, I wish we weren’t in this situation, I’d love to see the state parks fully funded. But you might want to check the background.

  5. By Chris Clarke on Jul 3, 2009

    No facts are twisted here, John. We’re using the State of California’s own figures. Yes, the funds come from people driving off-road, BUT only a very small percentage of people driving off-road are engaging in green-sticker type activities. The MAJORITY of off-road driving in California — again, using the state’s own figures — is done by people like me who stick to dirt roads, either driving them for pleasure or to get to a destination where they hike, camp, fish, birdwatch, ride horses, or engage in other non-motorized activities. Their money is going to support parks where those activities are forbidden.

    We’re not talking about registration fees or green-sticker fees or park entry fees: merely the off-roader fuel tax funds, the majority of which is collected from people doing non-green-sticker activities.

  6. By Kelly on Jul 7, 2009

    If off-road folks don’t like the law, they should work to change it. But misinterpreting it in order to have other people subsidize their hobby isn’t cool.

  7. By NorCalRider on Jul 10, 2009

    Really??? Are you sure you don’t want to change your answer? The law is clear already. SB742 passed nearly unanimously by the legislature and was supported by many environmental groups who worked collaboratively with the OHV community. Its very clear that the tax generated on fuel burned by street licensed vehicles and green sticker vehicles when driven off road to access motorized or nonmotorized recreation is to be deposited in the OHV trust fund for OHV recreation including law enforcement, restoration, trail maintenance, education. If State Parks wants some of the OHV trust $$ for their parks they are elligible if the “off road” routes generate the gas tax $$ are accessible to both street licensed and green sticker vehicles. Unfortunately, the author of this press release has failed to read the current law. Nobody wants to see State Parks closed and a solution needs to be found that is colaborative instead of punitive just because you don’t like OHV. If DPC would choose a collabortive approach that didn’t attack OHV you would find support from the OHV community which has had a successful user fee based program since 1971. Also, don’t forget the OHV trust fund has already “loaned” the State $90M this year alone.

  8. By Ron on Jul 12, 2009

    SB 742 is very specific about program funding.
    Funds are generated by not only off road vehicle registration but by the registration of street legal vehicles that use the OHV areas to recreate as well as vehicles required to transport OHV’s to the OHV areas.
    Even the OHV Division of the state Department of Parks & Recreation claims this program is user funded.

    And since when is hiking, camping, fishing, bird watching, horse back riding, or engaging in non-motorized activities forbidden in OHV areas. If you are there using the facilities regardless of your chosen activity, that is why you contribute to the fund.

  9. By Chris Clarke on Jul 15, 2009

    Unfortunately, the author of this press release has failed to read the current law.

    Not so. Nothing in the current law says that all activities supported by the Trust Fund must be accessible by green sticker vehicles. But the law does expressly state that non-green-sticker off-road activities must get their proportionate share of the Fund.

    And since when is hiking, camping, fishing, bird watching, horse back riding, or engaging in non-motorized activities forbidden in OHV areas.

    Is this a joke? It’s forbidden in some areas, and merely impossible in others.

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.