Does WDFW know it has an image problem?

[Curly]

Oh, another thing..........wdfw needs to really crack down on poachers.  The case that Ucwarden was involved with just shows that management don't care about elk and deer poachers. 

[vandeman17]

Even if they can't do anything about tribal harvest, I wish they would at least be open and honest when approached with questions about how things are done with the tribes. Full transparency would help me gain a lot of respect for them. 

[seth30]

My issue is the special permit's.  I have 6 points and yet to draw a second whidbey deer tag, while several people I know both on and off the forum pull them yearly.  Guess I pissed someone off at the WDFW

[RadSav]

I think it is rather worthless complaining much about WDFW while we have a Democrat in the governors mansion.  I realize there was Spellman, but arguably we haven't had a republican governor since Evans.  A lot has happened since the goat farmer took the seat.  I think we all see that when a politician does not like a program, and they can't get rid of it, they choose to ignore the bass turd child and hope it goes away.  That's not likely to change with the WDFW until we can get a real pro hunting and fishing republican to run and win!  And win at least four recounts too, I expect.

I think there are some good people in the WDFW these days.  But their hands are tied more than I think most of us want to believe.  With Lee Ray, environmentalist whackadoodle Spellman, Gardner, Lowry, Locke and Gregoire consecutively it's rather amazing it hasn't completely crumbled.  Though it doesn't seem as though that reality is too far away now between the wolves, cougar, hoof rot, steelhead and the sierra club.

[fair-chase]

Maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way, but to me an image problem would suggest something that can be cured through a PR campaign. WDFW cannot cure their problems by handing out ice cream cones at kids fishing days or posting cute pictures to a facebook page. There are serious management issues at WDFW that need to be aggressively addressed in order for me to have a favorable view of the department.

I have heard it stated that WDFW is beholden to many different groups, and therefore they must compromise. I simply do not buy that argument. If WDFW based all of their management practices on (1) the best available science and (2) maximizing recreational opportunities, then none of the opposing voices would have a credible argument. The fact is that WDFW bases it's decisions on political pressure because it's too flaccid to stand behind proven management practices. The wolf plan and the harvest quotas for cougar are two glaring examples of this.

[Bigshooter]

If I was director I would not worry about the permit system it is fine and if you changed it you would still have just as many people mad about changing it as you do now. There is not awhole lot that can be done about wolves or sealions without going through the feds.  And there is nothing that can be done about tribal hunting with the treaty's that have been signed.  So I think I would concentrate on more hunter opportunity, more youth opportunity, and more access.

[pianoman9701]

There should really be two questions: Are they aware and if so, do they care? I think they're well aware of it. I'm not sure whether or not they care.

I let them know at the meeting on Wednesday that I'm not purchasing special hunt apps for the first time in over a decade. I don't think they care but I'd bet their sales are down, in fact. The dissatisfaction of hunters in this state is growing.

[bearpaw]

Just curious- If you were appointed director what are the top 10 items you would immediately address? (Personnel changes don't count as that's obvious, nor do tribal matters as WDFW has virtually no discretion there, up to the courts)

Good question! 

Here are some quick ideas that come to mind:

1. Restructure Departments clearly identifying the responsibility to the customers each Dept serves. Example: Upland Game, Big Game, Predators, Nongame, Watchable Wildlife, Endangered Species, Shellfish, Salt Water Fish, Freshwater Fish, Hydraulics, etc. Make each of these Departments more separate from each other and charge them with improving service and opportunities to their respective users. This means more and better opportunities for all types of hunters, fishers, and non-consumptive users as well.

2. Have all Dept heads re-apply for their position and hold each department head responsible for the satisfaction of their customers.

3. Emphasize Customer Satisfaction throughout WDFW

4. Emphasize and implement multiple steps for Image Improvement

5. If there are funding issues for a particular Dept work to improve funding with the customers of that Dept.

6. Improve the availability for new hunters to take Hunter-Ed, this is the biggest bottleneck to recruiting new hunters.

7. The wolf plan is what it is. However, changes can be made to the plan and changes should be made in the areas where the most dissatisfaction exists.

8. Do more predator management rather than continually looking for ways to reduce predator management.

9. Take a more active approach to resolving the hatchery issues and natural spawning issues. This state needs more fishing opportunity, not less opportunity which is the way we are headed.

10. More emphasis on resolving the elk hoof rot issue.

11. Publicly visible steps to engage timber company issues and ensure continued access to timber company lands.

12. Address these issues of landowners taking advantage of access programs.

13. Publicly visible steps to attempt to deal with tribal issues.

[idahohuntr]

Maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way, but to me an image problem would suggest something that can be cured through a PR campaign. WDFW cannot cure their problems by handing out ice cream cones at kids fishing days or posting cute pictures to a facebook page. There are serious management issues at WDFW that need to be aggressively addressed in order for me to have a favorable view of the department.

I have heard it stated that WDFW is beholden to many different groups, and therefore they must compromise. I simply do not buy that argument. If WDFW based all of their management practices on (1) the best available science and (2) maximizing recreational opportunities, then none of the opposing voices would have a credible argument. The fact is that WDFW bases it's decisions on political pressure because it's too flaccid to stand behind proven management practices. The wolf plan and the harvest quotas for cougar are two glaring examples of this.

Maximizing recreational opportunities for who?  Wolf watchers? The Audubon society? Hunters? A balance of multiple user groups?

Much of wildlife management has little to do with science and a lot to do with what the public desires as voiced by elected representatives, user groups, and other stakeholders.  WDFW has to balance species recovery, recreational harvest, wildlife viewing etc. as part of their mission...these are not always compatible things, which means there has to be give and take.  Scientifically its pretty easy to figure out what needs to be done to increase elk numbers or deer numbers...but the real problems come in the form of what the DIVERSE public really wants.  How many elk should we have? How many wolves should we manage for? How many Cougars should we manage for?  Its not really up to WDFW to decide whether we should manage for trophy elk hunting or just lots of OTC opportunity...these are social issues to be decided by the public. Again, science and best available science has little to do with how wildlife are managed.  The science is really the easy part. Its telling the scientists what we want that gets hard.

[kentrek]

I wish science had more weight in wildlife management...human emotions shouldnt control nature

On a Side just had a convo today with a bio from oregon checking our fish....dad wanted to know why they dont spend more time doing shyt that would actually make a difference in the fisheries such as culling evasiv fish eating birds...equaly anoyed the bio said "we know...we know exactly what needs to happen...but we have too many special interest groups stopping us every time they try an kill something"...dad says " I know your not dumb, but If they are calling the shots why do we need you ?"...the bio showed alot of frustration with the convo, which is pretty reasonable, but I was pretty glad to see his hate for the special interest groups controlling things

I assume its not much different in Washington

[baldopepper]

Just curious- If you were appointed director what are the top 10 items you would immediately address? (Personnel changes don't count as that's obvious, nor do tribal matters as WDFW has virtually no discretion there, up to the courts)

Good question! 

Here are some quick ideas that come to mind:

1. Restructure Departments clearly identifying the responsibility to the customers each Dept serves. Example: Upland Game, Big Game, Predators, Nongame, Watchable Wildlife, Endangered Species, Shellfish, Salt Water Fish, Freshwater Fish, Hydraulics, etc. Make each of these Departments more separate from each other and charge them with improving service and opportunities to their respective users. This means more and better opportunities for all types of hunters, fishers, and non-consumptive users as well.

2. Have all Dept heads re-apply for their position and hold each department head responsible for the satisfaction of their customers.

3. Emphasize Customer Satisfaction throughout WDFW

4. Emphasize and implement multiple steps for Image Improvement

5. If there are funding issues for a particular Dept work to improve funding with the customers of that Dept.

6. Improve the availability for new hunters to take Hunter-Ed, this is the biggest bottleneck to recruiting new hunters.

7. The wolf plan is what it is. However, changes can be made to the plan and changes should be made in the areas where the most dissatisfaction exists.

8. Do more predator management rather than continually looking for ways to reduce predator management.

9. Take a more active approach to resolving the hatchery issues and natural spawning issues. This state needs more fishing opportunity, not less opportunity which is the way we are headed.

10. More emphasis on resolving the elk hoof rot issue.

11. Publicly visible steps to engage timber company issues and ensure continued access to timber company lands.

12. Address these issues of landowners taking advantage of access programs.

13. Publicly visible steps to attempt to deal with tribal issues.

These are  great ideas, and also things WDFW actually has in their power to address.  The next question is how do we as a group of consumptive outdoorsmen get behind, refine, and present such a list.  I think WDFW has become an easy target for us to hang our complaints on when it's obvious from the few comments already on this post that there is no real consensus, even amongst ourselves, about what they should do.  Seems everyone has a complaint, but not many have a valid solution (that being one that is actually within WDFW's power to implement).  Personally I don't think I'd take the directors job,  seems he has lots of enemies and very few friends.

[buckfvr]

If I was the Director, I would lobby for the elections of regional managers who are long time residents of the region they wish to manage. 

Even at the expense of my own job, I would want to see a person in tune with his community and his regions needs managing the resources free of Olympias politics.

I would have that elected manager build his team around him/herself, hiring those he needs, and have them all subject to a rotating civilian review board for grievances and complaints.

Regional management would be with out interference from politicians and non-scientific special interest agendas,  and be based entirely on the needs of the independent region. 

[vandeman17]

If I was the Director, I would lobby for the elections of regional managers who are long time residents of the region they wish to manage. 

Even at the expense of my own job, I would want to see a person in tune with his community and his regions needs managing the resources free of Olympias politics.

I would have that elected manager build his team around him/herself, hiring those he needs, and have them all subject to a rotating civilian review board for grievances and complaints.

Regional management would be with out interference from politicians and non-scientific special interest agendas,  and be based entirely on the needs of the independent region.

Simple yet would fix MANY issues that seem to plague the system. One of my biggest gripes is people in Olympia who have never even been to many areas of the state thinking they know what's best for the area.

[baldopepper]

Utah uses a RAC system (regional advisory committee). The state is divided into 5 regions and each has an advisory committee that meets 4 times a year.  Each committee is made up of various outdoors users in their region only.  They have open meetings, discuss issues and pass resolutions which are passed on for consideration by the state DWR.  Not perfect maybe, but at least each region feels like they have some voice in what takes place.

[bearpaw]

Just curious- If you were appointed director what are the top 10 items you would immediately address? (Personnel changes don't count as that's obvious, nor do tribal matters as WDFW has virtually no discretion there, up to the courts)

Good question! 

Here are some quick ideas that come to mind:

1. Restructure Departments clearly identifying the responsibility to the customers each Dept serves. Example: Upland Game, Big Game, Predators, Nongame, Watchable Wildlife, Endangered Species, Shellfish, Salt Water Fish, Freshwater Fish, Hydraulics, etc. Make each of these Departments more separate from each other and charge them with improving service and opportunities to their respective users. This means more and better opportunities for all types of hunters, fishers, and non-consumptive users as well.

2. Have all Dept heads re-apply for their position and hold each department head responsible for the satisfaction of their customers.

3. Emphasize Customer Satisfaction throughout WDFW

4. Emphasize and implement multiple steps for Image Improvement

5. If there are funding issues for a particular Dept work to improve funding with the customers of that Dept.

6. Improve the availability for new hunters to take Hunter-Ed, this is the biggest bottleneck to recruiting new hunters.

7. The wolf plan is what it is. However, changes can be made to the plan and changes should be made in the areas where the most dissatisfaction exists.

8. Do more predator management rather than continually looking for ways to reduce predator management.

9. Take a more active approach to resolving the hatchery issues and natural spawning issues. This state needs more fishing opportunity, not less opportunity which is the way we are headed.

10. More emphasis on resolving the elk hoof rot issue.

11. Publicly visible steps to engage timber company issues and ensure continued access to timber company lands.

12. Address these issues of landowners taking advantage of access programs.

13. Publicly visible steps to attempt to deal with tribal issues.

These are  great ideas, and also things WDFW actually has in their power to address.  The next question is how do we as a group of consumptive outdoorsmen get behind, refine, and present such a list.  I think WDFW has become an easy target for us to hang our complaints on when it's obvious from the few comments already on this post that there is no real consensus, even amongst ourselves, about what they should do.  Seems everyone has a complaint, but not many have a valid solution (that being one that is actually within WDFW's power to implement).  Personally I don't think I'd take the directors job,  seems he has lots of enemies and very few friends.

I agree with you about everyone being unhappy with the director. FYI - In my opinion the current director is the best we've had in decades. Any replacement may be far worse.

If we could come to some consensus on what most agree are good steps, I would attempt to make a recommendation.