WDFW bad rep

[JLS]

The only problem with your logic here is that, I believe, their camper/tent/motorhome is considered their domicile and unless they were driving with the headless ducks, they should have been fine, as they could have eaten them that night for dinner.  I don't think you have to leave a head/wing on it when you cook it at your campsite?     Once again, guilty until proven innocent

A tent, camper, motorhome, truck canopy or stout cardboard box is considered a temporary domicile, and  is not subject to warrantless search.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=77.15.094

If the individuals consented then there is no legal issue.

And we have no idea whether they did or not.  So your entire statement is based on suposition of the nth degree

That's probably why he used the word "if" in the sentence

[Button Nubbs]

That's called doing their job. If you have nothing to hide you shoiuldnt have a problem.

One should be cooperative within reason, but should never give up their rights "because they have nothing to lose".

He said the guys asked questions over and over again. Is that against your rights? I had the same expierence with an officerlast year. He asked me the same questions in circles, its a great wayto catch someone in a lie. Ileft thinking "damn that guy is good" not "what a jerk". Those guys are lied to all day every day,if they took everyone on their word they would never catch anyone.

[Simcoe hunter]

Rich appears to have the small mans disease.

That must be why the "BIG" dog

As a youngster my Dad worked for the old Fisheries Dept.  they had some great LEO's.  When the two departments were merged I remember meeting a couple of good gamies.  But I wouldn't give a plugged nickel for the last two we have had around here, particularly the current one.  He will ask the same question of you 3 or 4 times in a row and try to twist your answers to confuse you.  What an a$$.

That's called doing their job. If you have nothing to hide you shoiuldnt have a problem.

No, their job is to enforce the game laws of the state they work in, not try to twist your words and confuse things hoping you will start to doubt yourself and say something wrong that isn't true.  That should be left to the courtroom, after they find some actual evidence of a crime.

[509]

The WDFW has a very serious problem with their LEO's.  The lack of professionalism, local favoritism, and other issues have really hurt the department and their programs. 

I retired after 40 years of working in resource management in both the private and public sectors.   Their field biologists are fine, AND I can always tell immediately if I being checked by a field biologist or a LEO.  The difference in attitude is striking. 

It got so bad, that I sent out an informal e-mail to all my professional colleague's and asked about their "out of uniform" contacts with the WDFW LEO's.  To a person they were all negative.  One person even filed a complaint against the LEO!! 

The Department needs to start hiring PROFESSIONAL law enforcement personnel and at the same time relocate LEO's that are too "cozy" with the local community.  I would support transfer of the LEO force to Washington State Patrol as was proposed a few years ago. 

[Curly]

I've never had a problem with WDFW law enforcement.  (I have only been checked less than a half dozen times in over 30 years of hunting and fishing in this State.)

Maybe WDFW could have a reality show like the Montana wardens are on.  I like watching the shown "Wardens" and I suspect the show helps the image of the wardens.........

I think it would be interesting to see a WDFW version of the Montana Wardens show to see if they really are as bad as some people claim.  (Of course maybe they are different on camera than off camera? 

[huntnphool]

I've never had a problem with WDFW law enforcement.  (I have only been checked less than a half dozen times in over 30 years of hunting and fishing in this State.)

Maybe WDFW could have a reality show like the Montana wardens are on.  I like watching the shown "Wardens" and I suspect the show helps the image of the wardens.........

I think it would be interesting to see a WDFW version of the Montana Wardens show to see if they really are as bad as some people claim.  (Of course maybe they are different on camera than off camera? 

I talk to a couple of the Montana officers every year when over there, they are as personable and professional in person as they are on the show.

[Bob33]

The WDFW has a very serious problem with their LEO's.  The lack of professionalism, local favoritism, and other issues have really hurt the department and their programs. 

I retired after 40 years of working in resource management in both the private and public sectors.   Their field biologists are fine, AND I can always tell immediately if I being checked by a field biologist or a LEO.  The difference in attitude is striking. 

It got so bad, that I sent out an informal e-mail to all my professional colleague's and asked about their "out of uniform" contacts with the WDFW LEO's.  To a person they were all negative.  One person even filed a complaint against the LEO!! 

The Department needs to start hiring PROFESSIONAL law enforcement personnel and at the same time relocate LEO's that are too "cozy" with the local community.  I would support transfer of the LEO force to Washington State Patrol as was proposed a few years ago.

I assume you notified WDFW about these unprofessional encounters. Did you receive a separate reply for each incident? What follow up was done on your formal complaints?

[bobcat]

  Their field biologists are fine, AND I can always tell immediately if I being checked by a field biologist or a LEO.  The difference in attitude is striking.

That's the opposite of what I have experienced. Granted, it was only the one biologist that gave me the bad impression. But that's all I have to base my opinion on.

I've been contacted 4 or 5 times by game wardens while hunting, and I have not one bad thing to say about any of them. They were all friendly, professional, and treated me with respect.

Very much unlike the biologist, who harassed and interrogated me for absolutely no reason, other than in his imagination he apparently thought I was some sort of poacher because I happened to have an empty dog crate in the back of my vehicle.

I also don't feel it's appropriate for a wildlife biologist to act as if he is a law enforcement officer.

[509]

My employer did not want me to file a complaint against a fellow agency employee.  You know, you also lose free speech rights when you are a public employee!!!

The one person that did file a complaint noticed that the LEO had complaints filed in following years and was still working. 

I have never had a problem in Idaho or Montana.  It really does appear unique to Washington state in my opinion.  AND my first poor contact with WDFW wardens was in 1979 when I came over from Idaho to fish the seeps.

[JLS]

My employer did not want me to file a complaint against a fellow agency employee.  You know, you also lose free speech rights when you are a public employee!!!

The one person that did file a complaint noticed that the LEO had complaints filed in following years and was still working. 

I have never had a problem in Idaho or Montana.  It really does appear unique to Washington state in my opinion.  AND my first poor contact with WDFW wardens was in 1979 when I came over from Idaho to fish the seeps.

Well, shame on you for not knowing your rights.  You can file any complaint you want, and if you are disciplined for it you have legal recourse.  The only "free speech" you lose as a public employee is speaking up on political issues when you are using your official title.  I've worked in state government for over 15 years.

[Special T]

I give an example how the WDFW give them selves a bad rap, but it has NOTHING to do with LEO's  It has been talked about in another thread however... The WDFW supplemented the CRP program some years back. You got points for giving hunters acess to the property. Well the WDFW also put "written by permission only" signs on CRP ground where permission was specifically denied. I think this was done to make numbers look good that they had gained X amount of acres for hunting when the rality is they only provided habitat. I know many hunters are mad because they think that there was an interest in letting hunters hunt, when there was not. ALSO landowners have not enrolled in the WDFW programs because of the issues had with people hounding them for permission.   
I think this was a slight of hand that left a bad taste in many peoples mouth. Legally ANY land is Hunting by written permission only so by postin the sign they did nothing Legaly wrong, however they lost credibility with BOTH farmers and hunters. This is really too bad because Hunters NEED more access, and Farmers that may sign up fro a program are now more hesitent, and prefer to just give permission on thier own. 

[NoImpactNoIdea]

My employer did not want me to file a complaint against a fellow agency employee.  You know, you also lose free speech rights when you are a public employee!!!

The one person that did file a complaint noticed that the LEO had complaints filed in following years and was still working. 

I have never had a problem in Idaho or Montana.  It really does appear unique to Washington state in my opinion.  AND my first poor contact with WDFW wardens was in 1979 when I came over from Idaho to fish the seeps.

Well, shame on you for not knowing your rights.  You can file any complaint you want, and if you are disciplined for it you have legal recourse.  The only "free speech" you lose as a public employee is speaking up on political issues when you are using your official title.  I've worked in state government for over 15 years.

Thats funny...and incorrect.  Take a look at King Countys policy regarding the use of social media for their employees.

[JLS]

I'm not going to look it up.  I don't buy the argument you lose free speech as a government employee.  As an employee of ANY company, if you post stuff online that the don't want you to you can be disciplined.  Bottom line, I don't speak on behalf or act as a representative of my employer in any way, shape or form in my off time or on the internet.

YMMV.

[Bob33]

It is OK to post on Hunt WA (which is publicly accessible) about bad WDFW agents, but it is not OK to submit information confidentially to WDFW?

[WDFW Hates ME!!!]

I have had 2 interactions with a WDFW officer that didn't go my way. One was for handing my son a fishing pole with a salmon attached to it. I got a ticket for unlawful attempt to exceed my daily limit. My bad, it won't happen again.

The other was for misreading the regs. I kept a jack salmon, not as part of my daily limit. It was an extra. So i exceeded my daily limit. Both on the same river, by the same officer 2 years apart.

Both times he was respectful, but i owned up to my mistakes. I was unhappy with myself. He commended me for teaching my son how to fish for salmon without snagging. I was the only one fishing bobber and eggs, both times.
Every other time i have talked with an officer it has been good. My step neice is engaged to an WDFW officer, hope i don't screw up anymore. As i am sure i will hear about it. He is also the office on my favorite river so now i really need to watch my P's and Qs.