Why is Unsworth getting advice from Phil Anderson?

[Little Dave]

The former director is being paid to advise the new director?  Why?

The former director has made a number of bad policy decisions, writing a $40K check to wild fish zealot lawyers, closing fisheries, leaving important stakeholders out of the loop.  Recently, the awful result from the North of Falcon discussions.

Why is he still involved with the department?  Why do we need to pay for this very poor quality advice from Phil Anderson?

[stevemiller]

Would not make any sense,Is there a link to this?

[Little Dave]

Unsworth admitted this last week that he is not very familiar with fisheries.  So he is paying Phil Anderson as his consultant.

[stevemiller]

So the states not paying, Unsworth is out of his own pocket?

[Tbar]

Transition period. Many complexities here that go far deeper than wolf issues (one of Unsworths strong points).

[2labs]

This is why we need to break up WDFW. This state is very diverse in fisheries and wild life. Dept. of game ..... Dept of fisheries.

This IMO. Would keep libs on there half of the state.
Or not they would still wanna run the show!

[stevemiller]

So he will get a few pointers on the fishery I dont mind,If Anderson has done anything good at all it would be in fishery somewhere. 

[Skillet]

So he will get a few pointers on the fishery I dont mind,If Anderson has done anything good at all it would be in fishery somewhere. 

Unsworth would get steamrolled in North of Falcon without some good advice from a guy who's been there and done that, and Unsworth knows that.  You may not like all of the outcomes, but having an experienced negotiator at the table during that high-stakes poker game doesn't hurt at all.

[Little Dave]

We could have expected a better result from a block of wood.  We need a successful negotiator not an experienced negotiator with a bad record.  We were crushed in the North of Falcon negotiations.  Not only was it a bad result, precedence has been established to close additional fisheries.

[Skillet]

 Looks like you really weren't wanting answers to your questions... 

Have a nice day!

[pianoman9701]

I don't have a problem with him gaining from Anderson's experience. I imagine that it saves us money to not have him covering stuff that's already been covered once. I don't see it as a long-term solution.

[Tbar]

We could have expected a better result from a block of wood.  We need a successful negotiator not an experienced negotiator with a bad record.  We were crushed in the North of Falcon negotiations.  Not only was it a bad result, precedence has been established to close additional fisheries.

I think Anderson supporters are going to surface in large numbers.  There are many, many fisheries in the cross hairs and may be lost forever.  Once they are gone it will be permanent, with no chance of resurrection. Phil Anderson made some bold moves, it's to be determined what the future holds for Sportsman.  Many attacks on the outdoors as we know them now, from many directions.  I would welcome Anderson to the team in any capacity, as we need as much help as possible.

[JimmyHoffa]

Too bad Phil Anderson didn't hire a mentor for the hunting portion......
But as long as it isn't over a year, I think it would be kind of alright to have someone get Unsworth transitioned into the fishing side.  But then I think....would you do this with presidents?  Would you want Obummer lending his disastrous 'helping hand' to the next guy?

[pianoman9701]

  and, the guys aren't presidential material. Even with the Presidents, it's not unheard of for one to conference with the previous President.

[Tbar]

I think Phil Anderson will be appreciated more in the future than when he held his position.  I truly believe he was one of sportsmans best advocates in a long time.  Yes even hunting.

[ipkus]

I think Phil Anderson will be appreciated more in the future than when he held his position.  I truly believe he was one of sportsmans best advocates in a long time.  Yes even hunting.

That's unfortunate, because Phil was nothing but a shill for the commercial industry and the tribes.  Phil said the right things when pinpointed on recreational issues and then did nothing to follow through.  Phil was a continuation of the fisheries management disaster that was Koenings.

[Tbar]

I think Phil Anderson will be appreciated more in the future than when he held his position.  I truly believe he was one of sportsmans best advocates in a long time.  Yes even hunting.

That's unfortunate, because Phil was nothing but a shill for the commercial industry and the tribes.  Phil said the right things when pinpointed on recreational issues and then did nothing to follow through.  Phil was a continuation of the fisheries management disaster that was Koenings.

Those two are not even close to comparable IMO.

[ipkus]

I would love to hear some examples of what Phil did that was positive for recreational fisheries?

[grundy53]

I think Phil Anderson will be appreciated more in the future than when he held his position.  I truly believe he was one of sportsmans best advocates in a long time.  Yes even hunting.

 

[pianoman9701]

I think Phil Anderson will be appreciated more in the future than when he held his position.  I truly believe he was one of sportsmans best advocates in a long time.  Yes even hunting.

Even if you mean in view of a worse director, I don't see how that's possible. Whether his direct fault or his choice of section leaders, wildlife was severely neglected under his watch. This is evident in the lack of support received by Todd Vandivert in Operation Cody, the outrageous wolf plan, and the seemingly haphazard methods of other predator management. His lack of any kind of impact statement on I-594 has changed the very nature of Hunter Education and his acquiescence of gubernatorial appointments to the Commission has forever changed the face of wildlife management for the worse in WA. The watchers are making the rules while the hunters pay the bills. 

[renrutbocaj]

Those of you saying "We got crushed at NOF" and we are losing all our fisheries, its not all on Unsworth... look up the "Blob in Pacific Ocean" that will give you some indication as to why there are poor runs predicted for this year. Everyone had to take cuts this year, tribal too.
 

Unusually warm temperatures dominate three areas of the North Pacific: the Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska and an area off Southern California. The darker the red, the further above average the sea surface temperature. NOAA researchers are tracking the temperatures and their implications for marine life

[bigtex]

So he will get a few pointers on the fishery I dont mind,If Anderson has done anything good at all it would be in fishery somewhere. 

Unsworth would get steamrolled in North of Falcon without some good advice from a guy who's been there and done that, and Unsworth knows that.  You may not like all of the outcomes, but having an experienced negotiator at the table during that high-stakes poker game doesn't hurt at all.

How many times does someone retire and they tell the person that fills their position to call them if they have questions? Happens all the time, no difference here.

Already been said, Unsworth is a wildlife guy with not much fisheries experience. Anderson is definitely a fish guy. Put the two heads together. 

[Forks]

We could have expected a better result from a block of wood.  We need a successful negotiator not an experienced negotiator with a bad record.  We were crushed in the North of Falcon negotiations.  Not only was it a bad result, precedence has been established to close additional fisheries.

You really have not a clue as to what goes on as far as negotiating with all 17 (I believe) tribes in Western WA alone. Throw in non tribal commercial fisheries and you have a no win situation for many. As far as the comparison to former Director Koenings, you really need to do a little more research, but your posts do make me laugh.

[Little Dave]

How many times does someone retire and they tell the person that fills their position to call them if they have questions? Happens all the time, no difference here.

Indeed it does happen a lot.  Sometimes when the wrong person is consulted, it can be part of the reason why a business fails.

After somewhat of a scandal cutting a big check to a special interest group and changing fish planting policy without involving important stakeholders like sports fisherman, tribes, and dependent industries he should have lost a lot of credibility as both a statesman and good negotiator.

... as far as negotiating with all 17 (I believe) tribes in Western WA alone. Throw in non tribal commercial fisheries and you have a no win situation for many.

This impotent, spineless attitude of expecting failure will result in failure.  We invest a lot of time and money in this mission, we should demand results and require more effective people to represent our interests.

[Boss .300 winmag]

Little observation from my daughters graduation from WWU (Huxley College) the first environmental one in the world.

As long as the democrats hold the office of governorship we are screwed no matter what. The deptmartmemt of ecology director is an Indian women Cherokee and her husband is mixed Indian from many tribes of the Peuget sound area.

She ranted and raved about how Indians are the future of this states environmental future, as some of the graduates were Indian desendants. And that each grad are the future of all that is good in emviromental fight.

As the lousy potion she holds is a direct appoipntment from his majesty Enslee

At least my daughter believes in hunting and fishing the way I taught her.

I'm not trying to Indian bash, but the fox is in the hen house as I see it from my area, Skagit valley is a not well drill area now because it might upset the water levels for fish spawning.

Good thing my well is grandfathered as for now.

[Forks]

Little Dave, please lead us all to the person with the experience and conviction to negotiate seasons that will please all. The way I see it, it's a position that very, very few would want.

[Little Dave]

It seems that way sometimes.  It seems like a lot of people just don't give a damn about fisheries as long as freshly netted Muckleshoot fish are thrown at Pike Place, their chum eggs shipped to China and Copper River salmon is ready at QFC.  Who from these casual consumers would make a good negotiator except to pocket some money from one of the relatively well-funded minority stakeholders (tribes and commercial)?

On the contrary, there are dozens of people, volunteers, whose names are printed each month in "The Reel News" that would be capable of speaking on behalf of conservation-minded sports fisherman and dependent industries.

Unsworth may yet reach out to the many vocal leaders of sports fishing groups for help in this arena, but he needs to stop relying on Phil Anderson.

[RadSav]

If I want to learn how to drive a sports car I'm not going to ask the local Go-Cart operator.  If I want to learn how to kill an elk I'm not going to ask a treestand hunter from Ohio.  If I want to learn how to catch a steelhead I'm not going to spend a lot of time talking with Florida bass fishermen.  If I want to learn to fly a plane I'm not going to seek the advise of a kite manufacturer.  And if I want to learn how to navigate the political waters of Washington's WDFW directors position I'm not going to ask a river guide. 

Consulting with Anderson seems like a wise choice in preparing for the hostile, political landscape that engulfs that position.  I doubt he is asking for policy advise.  Most new executives have their own game plan for policy.  It's who you can trust, who you need to look out for and what protocall to follow that I expect Unsworth is hoping to get help with

[Little Dave]

Consulting with Anderson may have seemed like a wise choice, I'm fine with a brief tour of the building and an intro to staff, a polite farewell team lunch event.

To characterize conservation minded sportsmen who already work with the department and have appeared at senate hearings numerous times as incapable fishing guides is a scrappy argument.  There are quite a few well versed and capable people out there ready to step up if tapped.

[stevemiller]

Sounds like the new director is going to be doomed by some before he can have a chance to check stuff out.Give the guy a break,When you start work somewhere and I dont care where it is or how much experiance you have you consult with the people there or the people you are replacing almost always.  I still think he will do a fine job if given the chance.,We cant complain about everyone all the time,We asked for a replacement now were supposed to complain about him Good Grief.

[WSU]

My 2 cents: Anderson did Unsworth a disservice this year at NOF.  WDFW's position that a good deal is better than no deal caused the failure.  The tribe demanded we don't fish or else.  That begs the question: or else what?  We folded and gave up our fishery in area 10 for what?  So we could get a deal saying we don't fish. 

50% cuts both ways and Unsworth, who I hear encouraging things about, got a crash course in fish politics.  Good riddance Anderson is gone and Unsworth will be better off in the future after learning the hard way. 

[stevemiller]

  Thats how I see it also.

[Todd_ID]

In my few dealings with the new director I've no qualms with him as a leader. I've been treated with respect, and I felt my message was received and not ignored. I say we give him a fighting chance. We'll revisit the choice if things turn for the worse in ways he could have fixed. It's a job I don't think I'd want for that reason.