WDFW - What do We Want in a New Director?

[northwesthunter84]

I would like to see better and more predator control including baiting for bear, hounds for cats and state wide spring bear season (not damage control hunts that the timber companies are charging for). That will allow animal numbers to increase in conjuction with a large push in habitat restoration state wide.  Give the animals a break and give them the proper amount of browse/forage then the numbers will expand.  Work more with land owners to control populations with general season hunting and severly limit the damage control hunting.  Then we will have more opportunities.  In areas where numbers allow then increase tag availablility.  For the birds work with landowners to create cover (wind rows, ditch lines), promote wildlife as a renewable resource.  Be honest with the constituents (hunters and fishermen) and go to bat for them when required.  Do what they can with the enforcement side of the house knowing that voters need to do their part and push for stiffer punishment on those cases.  That will require working with the legislature to make the penalties stick.

[pianoman9701]

I want a director that will clean house in the enforcement division.  Someone to get rid of Cenci.  UC Warden opened our eyes to what is/has been going on by writing his book.  Having Cenci still employed by this state is terrible.  He shouldn't be employed by the state, much less be the enforcement chief.

Someone who will try to improve relations between wdfw and the sportsmen of this state.  Stop pandering to the leaf licking, wolf hugging types. 

Someone that doesn't look bored to death at the wildlife meetings.  (One meeting I went to Anderson looked like he was ready to fall asleep).

I want a director who will make it known to his enforcment chief that ticky tack, b.s. type citations issued to normally law abiding sportsmen are not what they should be out doing.  If there are laws on the books that they can technically cite someone for, but it is a b.s. law, they should not be citing for it.  For example issuing citations to a hunter for wastage if he leaves a coyote lay is ludicrous.  Same with harassing a hunter, accusing him of spotlighting, when he is simply walking out of the woods after dark with a headlamp on.  (They need to be getting the poachers, not the guys that get caught in honest mistakes or little known laws).

We need a director that will do what it takes to get a certain tribe in the south-central part of the state to quit selling game commercially.  Maybe he can get behind installing gates and keeping winter range a safe place for deer and elk.

Hoof rot should have been a higher priority than it has been.  Only took 20 years for them to start to get serious about it.  (So, hopefully when issues like that arise, there will be quicker response).

WDFW needs to find ways of getting hunters to kill more coyotes.  Instead, wdfw has tried to eliminate hunting coyotes at night, want to eliminate predator hunting derbies/contests; they have stopped us from hunting coyotes with dogs.  They are not doing the deer and elk fawns any favors by continually making it harder to take coyotes.

Apparently the director needs to step in and overrule some biologists.  The cougar and bear bios are nuts.  Spring bear permits could be issued for probably every GMU in the state.  And the cougar quotas they have are a joke.

It's almost like we need someone who is a longtime hunter, fisherman, trapper, and is good in politics.  Someone with a biology degree may be a good thing, but that could be bad too depending on their views.

++Stop pandering to the leaf licking, wolf hugging types.++

What is a leaf licking, wolf hugging type?

 

If you have to ask, you're probably one. 

[Curly]

  

My definition is someone who wants an amount of wolves that is not healthy for this state.  Someone that cares about wolves above people and other wildlife.  A leaf licker is just a tree hugger........they don't want logging; they want everything left natural.  They hate ATV use even if in a legal area.  You get the idea.
 

[Curly]

I think it would be great to have a bio as director.  But they'd have to be someone like WAcenturian or Doublelung.

[gasman]

I know what we don't need, another politician 

[baldopepper]

Someone with an IQ of 10 because you'd have to be an idiot to take that no win job.

[Jingles]

Did not see this as an option so will say it outright
A Director that looks at the facts of past studies when making a decision instead of just listening to his " Tree hugging Leaf Licking gofors

Also being a Gold Miner with a dredge There have been numerous studies done that prove dredging is actually beneficial for fish and the WDFW can't get that through their heads all they say is it is bad they refuse to consider scientific studies. That is the reason I want a director that looks at the FACTS

[BOWHUNTER45]

Did not see this as an option so will say it outright
A Director that looks at the facts of past studies when making a decision instead of just listening to his " Tree hugging Leaf Licking gofors

Jingles ...how are the fires looking little of topic but needs it 

[JimmyHoffa]

Someone with an IQ of 10 because you'd have to be an idiot to take that no win job.

Hey!  I'd take the job.  I would probably get canned in the first week after sending a bill to BC and Alaska for all the salmon that are 'supposed' to return here but don't...yet WE incurr all the habitat improvement costs and reduced tablescrap seasons.  If that didn't get me fired...then making all the wolf files public (including individual collar frequencies...so hippies can go wolf watching) probably would.  If not that...then the year round unlimited quota with bounty paid for cougars likely would.  And Cenci would have to clean house so fast it would draw a vaccuum in Olytown.  Actually I'd probably only make it a day there. 

[Jingles]

Did not see this as an option so will say it outright
A Director that looks at the facts of past studies when making a decision instead of just listening to his " Tree hugging Leaf Licking gofors

Jingles ...how are the fires looking little of topic but needs it 

Haven't been to Incident base today or even looked at a map but still can't see the sky for the smoke and the fire crews still running back and forth in front of the house twice a day so hopefully they are going somewhere to get a better handle on at least containment lines.  Heading out Friday for opener of Bear season and spend the day looking for Yogi, found an area with lots of berries and good sign far enough back that don't have to worry about other hunters or Trail walkers

[jasnt]

Did not see this as an option so will say it outright
A Director that looks at the facts of past studies when making a decision instead of just listening to his " Tree hugging Leaf Licking gofors

Also being a Gold Miner with a dredge There have been numerous studies done that prove dredging is actually beneficial for fish and the WDFW can't get that through their heads all they say is it is bad they refuse to consider scientific studies. That is the reason I want a director that looks at the FACTS

+1

[bearpaw]

I like many of the points mentioned, here's my short list of requirements:

Must be a hunter/fisher
Must understand the issues facing Washington wildlife/hunters/fishers
Manage predators more aggressively
Improve Washington's fishing and big game herds for more opportunity and revenue
Emphasis on commercial poaching
Improve accountability and respect of WDFW
Stabilize tribal, big timber, and environmental issues that threaten wildlife/hunting/fishing
Aggressively cut the fat in WDFW due to upcoming budget constraints (15% reduction anticipated next year)
Use other options to reduce WDFW budget rather than simply eliminating wardens and hatcheries
Good people skills and good negotiating skills to negotiate in the best interest of wildlife/hunting/fishing/trapping

[bigtex]

"More Aggressive on Arrest and Conviction of Poachers"

While WDFW/the Director can place an emphasis on becoming more aggressive in the apprehension of poachers, they have NO say on the conviction. If we want poachers convicted then contact your locally elected County Prosecutor. It's not WDFW's fault that a bad guy gets away with something (if the officer actually forwards charges).

[RG]

I think the director should have a minimum of 30 years outdoor experience as a hunter and fisherman.  They should have personally harvested at least 5 game animals, game birds, a steelhead, salmon, trout, and bass.  They should have spent a minimum of 30 nights in a hunting camp that doesn't have tin walls.  They should be able to produce a pair of hiking boots that they wore out. They should have hunted and/or fished in 3 other states or provinces besides Washington.  They should have children or grandchildren who are following in their footsteps as an outdoors person.  They must understand that it's necessary to manage by science and proven best practice rather than by political and special interest pressure or whim.

Other characteristics that would be preferred but not required, no friends in politics, training in wildlife and/or fisheries management, experience in working with divergent groups of people,.

This person would be a clearly committed outdoors person with adequate experience to know the difference between theory and fact.  They would be a been there, done that person who obviously values hunting and fishing and the outdoor experience.  With no political history or ties they may not be open for influence from the special interest groups.  They don't have to be a bio or know everything there is to know.  That's why they hire the experts.  They need to know the difference between reality and BS and have the right point of reference regarding what is important for the outdoors people and game animals of Washington.  They also need to have a proven record of making decisions and standing up for what is right even if it isn't especially popular.  In other words they need to have a backbone and a pair.  The important thing is that this person is a leader and is willing to stand up front and lead the agency forward to do what is right.  They need to be able to disagree with the governor and powers that be and must not be afraid to stand up in front of the media and say what needs to be said.  They need to support and stick up for the employees of WDFW in spite of political pressure from special interest or other meddling politicians.

[pianoman9701]

"More Aggressive on Arrest and Conviction of Poachers"

While WDFW/the Director can place an emphasis on becoming more aggressive in the apprehension of poachers, they have NO say on the conviction. If we want poachers convicted then contact your locally elected County Prosecutor. It's not WDFW's fault that a bad guy gets away with something (if the officer actually forwards charges).

Although BT, they have quite a bit to do with the prosecution in the way they provide timely assistance and evidence handling. We can see from Reading ucwarden's book that they don't always do that. In fact, the lack of this support led to an embarrassingly minor sentence in the worst poaching case in the state's history. The prosecutor has no choice but to offer reduced penalties when evidence is poorly handled or not provided. This is a major problem with our present LE administration and to me, indicates a department-wide attitude that prosecuting serious wildlife crimes is not high on their list of priorities. That needs to change. As someone else has mentioned, raising money by busting regular guys who make simple mistakes instead of going after real criminals seems to be their MO.