Washington legislators are considering a proposal that would take money from a fund used to clean up hazardous waste and give it to private landowners to clean up trash left behind by hunters and other visitors.

House Bill 1033, sponsored by Rep. Brian Blake, D-Aberdeen, Rep. Joel Kretz, R-Wauconda and Rep. Christopher Hurst, D-Enumclaw, would preserve free public access to private forestlands that have closed or are significantly reduced in acreage because of the cost of trash cleanup. In exchange, private landowners who choose to allow free access would receive a subsidy for garbage cleanup.

According to the proposal, cleanup could be performed by state Department of Fish and Wildlife staff, contracts through a third party, cash payments to landowners or through the help of the Washington Conservation Corps, a youth program run by the Department of Ecology.

Money for trash cleanup would come from the state’s Model Toxic Control Account, which is designed to pay for cleanup of solid and hazardous waste materials and contaminated sites, and reduce toxic pollutants and threats to public health and the environment. The account is funded by the Hazardous Substance Tax imposed on petroleum products, pesticides and certain chemicals.

One percent of the revenue in the Model Toxic Control Account is reserved for public participation grants, which are awarded to nonprofit groups that investigate and work directly to implement the state’s hazardous waste priorities. This bill would cap the 1 percent at the 2011-2013 biennium funding level, which is roughly $4 million, and any revenues above this established 1 percent would be dedicated to a Fish and Wildlife cleanup program.

In a public hearing in the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee Jan. 14, various state agencies and nonprofit groups expressed concern with shifting the money from hazardous waste cleanup to trash cleanup.

Suellen Mele of Zero Waste Washington, a nonprofit group that lobbies on waste reduction and recycling issues, which is among the organizations that competes for grant money from the state toxics control account, said, “This bill will shift funds away from the intended purpose of this money. While we understand the need to do this kind of cleanup, that is outside the purpose and intent of the funds that were set aside specifically for public participation grants.”

Mele contends the grants help communities participate in hazardous site cleanup, and capping these funds would decrease citizen participation.

Brian Calkins, small game and hunter access section manager for Fish and Wildlife, says many of the landowners who used to allow the public on their land for free have began to charge fees for access.

“Approximately 1.3 million acres in southwest Washington has gone into a fee-access program in the last 10 years,” he said.

In addition to waste cleanup, Calkins said the funding could also be used for other prevention activities, such as gate monitoring by staff or volunteers and law enforcement to discourage unlawful acts, such as dumping.

Calkins says his agency supports the concept of the bill, but acknowledges the funding source might impact other beneficial programs.

“Funding programs at the Legislature are always difficult decisions to make, especially if you’re taking income from one place and putting it in another,” Calkins said. “There’s impact to another beneficial program so perhaps sponsors of the bill could identify another source.”