Legislation Would Expand DNR Law Enforcement Authority

[pianoman9701]

Our system of government agrees with them then. More law enforcement is not always good and taking jurisdictional decisions out of the hands of the locals could well undermine democratic principle. His objections were completely in line with my original misgivings and in fact, confirmed them for me. Bigtex, if you were a local mounty, you might well feel the same way. As a state dude, you probably are not thrilled when the feds roll into town and say, "we're here. the rest of you can all go home now." I have great respect for what you and the other DFW LE do for us. I have more respect for democratic principle and liberty. There are limits, as there should be.

[CementFinisher]

sounds like they want to up their revenue collection to me. I SAY A BIG FAT NO!

[bigtex]

sounds like that want to up their revenue collection to me. I SAY A BIG FAT NO!

How would it up DNR's revenue? DNR doesn't get $ from their citations.

[6x6in6]

sounds like that want to up their revenue collection to me. I SAY A BIG FAT NO!

How would it up DNR's revenue? DNR doesn't get $ from their citations.

And that's what surprises me, already knowing this.  Why would it be such a big deal to the county's?   Just the territorial power play kind of thing?

And thanks bigtex for posting up info and links like these here.  Good stuff!!!   

[bigtex]

sounds like that want to up their revenue collection to me. I SAY A BIG FAT NO!

How would it up DNR's revenue? DNR doesn't get $ from their citations.

And that's what surprises me, already knowing this.  Why would it be such a big deal to the county's?   Just the territorial power play kind of thing?

Honestly, Yes!

The "diplomatic" response is "we wan't local control". Well the DNR Officer already works in the county, what difference does it make if they are on DNR lands, or the local highway?

[CementFinisher]

So other than bringing in more money for whoever and being a pain in the A** to everyone who visit these lands and the rural towns near them? what good will this do? I think most of us would beleive that they then wouldnt be taking care of thier land. they would be sitting out on the rural roads leading up to the dnr areas handing out speeding tickets, for having mud falling off your rig and all the other little gems they like to get you for

[bigtex]

So other than bringing in more money for whoever and being a pain in the A** to everyone who visit these lands and the rural towns near them? what good will this do? I think most of us would beleive that they then wouldnt be taking care of thier land. they would be sitting out on the rural roads leading up to the dnr areas handing out speeding tickets, for having mud falling off your rig and all the other little gems they like to get you for

Read my initial posts for your answers. It tells you the benefits of this. And remember, this already goes on in 25-30 counties.

[pianoman9701]

sounds like that want to up their revenue collection to me. I SAY A BIG FAT NO!

How would it up DNR's revenue? DNR doesn't get $ from their citations.

And that's what surprises me, already knowing this.  Why would it be such a big deal to the county's?   Just the territorial power play kind of thing?

Honestly, Yes!

The "diplomatic" response is "we wan't local control". Well the DNR Officer already works in the county, what difference does it make if they are on DNR lands, or the local highway?

Let's put a different spin on this. The feds want jurisdiction over our state law enforcement to the extent that they want all records pertaining to gun registration and CPLs in WA. The State refuses. Is this just a power play thing? Why would it be such a big deal? It's a big deal because the more localized you keep your government, the more it represents you.

Those in E. WA would not benefit from this bill near as much as those in W. WA, because the DNR boys are being sent out of Olympia and by a democrat-controlled state government with democrat ideas and rules. Put this bill down, and enforcement is decided by the people you live with. The local sheriff in Jefferson Co. can decide on his own if he wants to give jurisdiction to DNR LE or not. It might be in your best interest or it might not. Keep as much government local as you can and you'll find that it works the way it's supposed to much more often.

[6x6in6]

Bigtex, is Whatcom County one county that has presently commisioned DNR LE?
I'm not going to call Elfo (yes others, that is the sheriffs name  ) if he has commisioned DNR LE already and waste his time.
Thanks!!

[CementFinisher]

i did read the first page just couldn't find the benefit lol. Eatonville WA, ashford, naches, I think are a good example of them not taking care of their lands and just sitting out on access points between town and the dnr land.

[bigtex]

sounds like that want to up their revenue collection to me. I SAY A BIG FAT NO!

How would it up DNR's revenue? DNR doesn't get $ from their citations.

And that's what surprises me, already knowing this.  Why would it be such a big deal to the county's?   Just the territorial power play kind of thing?

Honestly, Yes!

The "diplomatic" response is "we wan't local control". Well the DNR Officer already works in the county, what difference does it make if they are on DNR lands, or the local highway?

Those in E. WA would not benefit from this bill near as much as those in W. WA, because the DNR boys are being sent out of Olympia and by a democrat-controlled state government with democrat ideas and rules. Put this bill down, and enforcement is decided by the people you live with. The local sheriff in Jefferson Co. can decide on his own if he wants to give jurisdiction to DNR LE or not. It might be in your best interest or it might not. Keep as much government local as you can and you'll find that it works the way it's supposed to much more often.

There are 2 DNR LEO's on the eastside, why? Because most of the DNR land is on the westside. And the DNR land on the eastside that does get patrolled is in the cascade range or in the NE counties, not in the columbia basin or SE WA. DNR could easily have just one LEO for Kittitas County, but instead he is responsible for 15 counties. In fact you could probably have one DNR LEO each for Yakima, Kittitas, Chelan, and Okanogan Counties.

"are being sent out of Olympia" well you could say that for every state law enforcement agency in this state.

[bigtex]

i did read the first page just couldn't find the benefit lol. Eatonville WA, ashford, naches, I think are a good example of them not taking care of their lands and just sitting out on access points between town and the dnr land.

Well 25-30 Sheriff's in this state see a benefit. The benefit is they are able to act as an LEO when something happens right in front of them when they are off DNR lands.

When you say eatonville/ashford I assume you are talking about the Elbe Forest. The officer who handles Pierce County also handles King which is where most of his time is spent since that is where most of the problems are and visitation is. Up until mid-summer 2012 he was also responsible for Mason and Kitsap counties. Do they have a staffing shortage? Duh. The officer for DNR in Yakima and Kittitas Counties has 15 E WA counties under his area.

[pianoman9701]

Defeating this bill wouldn't mean that DNR doesn't get those jurisdictions. It just means that it's up to each county sheriff. I really like being represented locally. Deputies are my neighbors. DNR guys may or may not be. Sorry to disagree with you on this BT. I really like what you do here. I just may not always agree with your or your department's position.

[bigtex]

Bigtex, is Whatcom County one county that has presently commisioned DNR LE?
I'm not going to call Elfo (yes others, that is the sheriffs name  ) if he has commisioned DNR LE already and waste his time.
Thanks!!

Unless something changed in the past 2 or so years yes Whatcom does. Skagit County has as well. Skagit County also commissions National Park Service Rangers. I believe both Skagit and Whatcom commissions USFS Officers as well.

[pianoman9701]

i did read the first page just couldn't find the benefit lol. Eatonville WA, ashford, naches, I think are a good example of them not taking care of their lands and just sitting out on access points between town and the dnr land.

Well 25-30 Sheriff's in this state see a benefit. The benefit is they are able to act as an LEO when something happens right in front of them when they are off DNR lands.

When you say eatonville/ashford I assume you are talking about the Elbe Forest. The officer who handles Pierce County also handles King which is where most of his time is spent since that is where most of the problems are and visitation is. Up until mid-summer 2012 he was also responsible for Mason and Kitsap counties. Do they have a staffing shortage? Duh. The officer for DNR in Yakima and Kittitas Counties has 15 E WA counties under his area.

So they can authorize jurisdiction individually if they need the help. What's the problem with that?