WDFW Director Unsworth has a bad day

[gee_unit360]

WDFW is terrible...

[winshooter88]

When I watched the video it sounded like the Chairman said that there wasn't broad support for the fee increases, not that there wasn't support for more enforcement officers. At the meeting I attended and at the GMAC meeting there wasn't much support for the fee increases. Yes people want increased hunting and fishing opportunities, but most don't seem to believe that WDFW would manage to make any real increases even with more money coming in, they don't do a good job now, why should we think more money would change things. People seem to be saying that they are not willing to spend more money only to see less hunting and fishing available or affordable to them.

[goldenhtr]

Take a look at Director Unsworth's presentation to the Senate Ways and Means Committee:
www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=9375922947&eventID=2017011402&eventID=2017011402&autoStartStream=true

You will want to start the video at 01:01:00, then make sure and watch it through 01:11:45
It's priceless

Not finding the video with this link??

[ucwarden]

Wow, thanks for posting!  What a bs artist unsworth is, where do we go from here??  Not real positive about our future of fish n game in this state with him in charge.

At some point I keep hoping the commission will wake up and do the right thing, but nothing yet.  I really don't know where we go from here.

[ucwarden]

When I watched the video it sounded like the Chairman said that there wasn't broad support for the fee increases, not that there wasn't support for more enforcement officers. At the meeting I attended and at the GMAC meeting there wasn't much support for the fee increases. Yes people want increased hunting and fishing opportunities, but most don't seem to believe that WDFW would manage to make any real increases even with more money coming in, they don't do a good job now, why should we think more money would change things. People seem to be saying that they are not willing to spend more money only to see less hunting and fishing available or affordable to them.

Having spent my career in WDFW enforcement, I of-course support full funding of enforcement, and also believe we need more officers..........BUT, until someone makes some major changes to the enforcement administration and corrects the problems I can't support a license increase.
Until they show us how they will use the money wisely, and will stop the corruption, I am opposed to any increase at all.

[ucwarden]

Take a look at Director Unsworth's presentation to the Senate Ways and Means Committee:
www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=9375922947&eventID=2017011402&eventID=2017011402&autoStartStream=true

You will want to start the video at 01:01:00, then make sure and watch it through 01:11:45
It's priceless

Not finding the video with this link??
I just checked http://www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=9375922947&eventID=2017011402&eventID=2017011402&autoStartStream=true and it popped right up

[JDHasty]

So, let me get this straight:  You are having recruitment problems.  But you arbitrarily decide to make pheasant release sites non-toxic.  And a kid can no longer go with his dad to a pawn shop w/a buck fifty and pick up an Ithaca 20 ga and still be reliably successful behind flushing dogs.  You cannot afford "exotic" 20 ga ammo, you cannot shoot lead, you are stuck with a heavy and bulky 12 ga.  That leaves a kid packing around two more pounds of gun all morning while trying to keep up and when you try to swing through and shoot... you are just not big enough yet.  Boy, doesn't that make for an experience you want to repeat again soon? 

Make absolutely no mistake about it, I walked WDFW through what this order would accomplish and I pointed out that when I was a kid in western Washington more kids were started out hunting on the release sites than any other opportunity. 

Holy smokes, this isn't rocket surgery.   These people are so damnably out of touch with the end users that they may as well be deaf and blind.  It really is that bad when you get to the decision making echelon of that Agency.   

[trophyhunt]

When I watched the video it sounded like the Chairman said that there wasn't broad support for the fee increases, not that there wasn't support for more enforcement officers. At the meeting I attended and at the GMAC meeting there wasn't much support for the fee increases. Yes people want increased hunting and fishing opportunities, but most don't seem to believe that WDFW would manage to make any real increases even with more money coming in, they don't do a good job now, why should we think more money would change things. People seem to be saying that they are not willing to spend more money only to see less hunting and fishing available or affordable to them.

Having spent my career in WDFW enforcement, I of-course support full funding of enforcement, and also believe we need more officers..........BUT, until someone makes some major changes to the enforcement administration and corrects the problems and can't support a license increase.
Until they show us how they will use the money wisely, and will stop the corruption, I am opposed to any increase at all.

, great point!

[goldenhtr]

Take a look at Director Unsworth's presentation to the Senate Ways and Means Committee:
www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=9375922947&eventID=2017011402&eventID=2017011402&autoStartStream=true

You will want to start the video at 01:01:00, then make sure and watch it through 01:11:45
It's priceless

Not finding the video with this link??
I just checked http://www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=9375922947&eventID=2017011402&eventID=2017011402&autoStartStream=true and it popped right up

Got it thanks. adblocker was blocking it:)

All I can say is WOW:(

[olyguy79]

Having spent my career working in the legislative branch I'd be shocked if there's not a fee increase, I don't think it'll be to extent of the current proposal however.

It's essentially a damned if you do, damned if you don't.

If the legislature raises fees then sportsman will complain about paying more.

If they don't raise fees then WDFW will cut back on services (hatcheries, lands upkeep, enforcement, etc.) and sportsman will complain about the cut in services.

Either way sportsman complain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mudman]

Having spent my career working in the legislative branch I'd be shocked if there's not a fee increase, I don't think it'll be to extent of the current proposal however.

It's essentially a damned if you do, damned if you don't.

If the legislature raises fees then sportsman will complain about paying more.

If they don't raise fees then WDFW will cut back on services (hatcheries, lands upkeep, enforcement, etc.) and sportsman will complain about the cut in services.

Either way sportsman complain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are you serious!  Sounds like the out of touch crap a career Gov legislator would say!  Let me guess give more and more $ and Gov will make us all happy.  What a crock...  Why don't they get their sheet together.  Mic drop.  Don't peddle that crap here please.   Step back 50 years and check prices and budgets and tell me who did better?

[ucwarden]

Having spent my career working in the legislative branch I'd be shocked if there's not a fee increase, I don't think it'll be to extent of the current proposal however.

It's essentially a damned if you do, damned if you don't.

If the legislature raises fees then sportsman will complain about paying more.

If they don't raise fees then WDFW will cut back on services (hatcheries, lands upkeep, enforcement, etc.) and sportsman will complain about the cut in services.

Either way sportsman complain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are you serious!  Sounds like the out of touch crap a career Gov legislator would say!  Let me guess give more and more $ and Gov will make us all happy.  What a crock...  Why don't they get their sheet together.  Mic drop.  Don't peddle that crap here please.   Step back 50 years and check prices and budgets and tell me who did better?

Mudman:  I appreciate your support and comments, but let's please keep it civil and respect other's opinions, even if you totally disagree.  I don't believe olyguy was saying that is what he wants to happen, but rather what his experience tells him will happen, and I agree.  Whenever WDFW has had budget problems in the past, they have always cut the things the public wants the most; hatcheries and enforcement.  It's just the way they do business.  Cut what people want the most, and you will get support for a budget increase.  Cut biologists, administrators, and officer managers, and nobody will even notice.  That's the way it works.  Doesn't make it right, but it's fact. 
However, this time, if I were a legislator I would hold the line, and block the budget increase.  I would make it clear that until WDFW gets it's act together and addresses the corruption and mismanagement, no more money.  As a sportsman I am willing to suffer the consequences, for the greater good in this case.

[ucwarden]

What amazes me about Director Unsworth and his management staff, is that they have decided to simply ignore any reports or complaints of wrong-doing committed by their own subordinates.  For example; Unsworth, Stohr, and Acting Chief Anderson have all ignored correspondences I have sent directly to them, when those correspondences present factual evidence of improper and/or illegal behavior committed by their "command staff".  They simply do not respond, and seem to have decided that if they ignore the problem, it will go away on it's own.

Well, the dressing down Unsworth received from the senator, is a prime example of what happens when you ignore the ugly truth for too long. 

When Unsworth came to us from Idaho, I was excited to finally get a fair and neutral party in command.  I naively thought he would take some time to figure out what is truth and what is fiction, then would set about clearing out the bad apples, and getting the program back in shape.  Instead he seems to have been taken in by those who are the very problems he should have been addressing, and has become part of the problem instead of the solution.

It is very discouraging for WDFW employees, as well as us sportsmen that neither the director nor the commission seems to care about the employees of WDFW, or the sportsmen who (largely) pay their way.

I applaud the senator for calling Unsworth out, as well as Senator Pearson (and others) for trying to get WDFW back on track, but I haven't seen any real progress yet.       

[Wacenturion]

"Whenever WDFW has had budget problems in the past, they have always cut the things the public wants the most; hatcheries and enforcement.  It's just the way they do business.  Cut what people want the most, and you will get support for a budget increase.  Cut biologists, administrators, and officer managers, and nobody will even notice.  That's the way it works."

Exactly what happens and did happen for my entire career.  Makes absolutely no sense if proper management is what the goal is.  Give you just one example and believe me there are many.  The Wildlife Area Program should be a shining example of management and a huge source of positive PR for WDFW.  However wildlife areas and their budgets, outside of some corp funding, have stayed pretty much custodial from when I went to work in the early 70's.  WDFW is right near the top as far as total acres of owned or managed lands in the country.  Once recognized as a leader in that respect.  However the leadership stops at actual management for the most part.  Understaffed and short on funds, the managers are simply custodians with the exception of some who make lemonade out of lemons.

My sense has always been if you are proud of the vast amount of opportunity that wildlife areas have, then manage them properly.  Otherwise the agency just gets negative press.  If you are going to enforce game laws, then staff at a level that at least makes some sense.  Don't expect one agent to cover an area that should be handled by multiple staff.  Hatchery program was the largest in the world, but ideologies changed and hatcheries did as well.  You manage what you have properly before you take on additional responsibilities, irregardless of what the legislature heaps on you.  Oh and what was mentioned above in one response, you don't do things to reduce you client base, you try to add to it.  When I took on management of the non existant turkey program back in the mid 80's you would not believe the naysayers and npon native haters....we did that before,  people have left hunting and doing other things, they're invasive and will eat all our slugs.. bla, bla, bla.  Any excuse not to try to do something different and provide opportunity.  Just like the movie Field of Dreams, if you build it he will come", actually works with additional recreational opportunity.  WDFW vendors in Colville and surrounding areas now sell more turkey tags in the northeast than deer tags.  Been that ways for years now.  Proof is in the results.

Unfortunately WDFW is politicized and full of "lets not rock the boat types".  The new Director, like many before him, again serves as a role model for doing nothing.  Many in the upper WDFW management levels are comfortable in their weekly meetings where they pretty much play devil's advocate for most of their careers and feel biologically empowered.  Many of those headquarter and regional office jobs are quite frankly, luxuries and generally unnecessary.  However little power dynasties have been built over decades to justify higher managerial pay grades.  Sad, but true.  If they say it's not true they're drinking their own kool aid. 

I ran a program with 21 staff properly equipped with only one Olympia office staff position....myself.  Futhermore I got down and dirty in the field doing eveything field staff did planting shrubs, driving tractors, trapping turkeys...on and on every chance I got.  Every position was an active field position to get work done.  The program unlike most was not top loaded with more chiefs than indians.  Simple and effective.  We accomplished more in the short 10 years despite roadblocks than most programs will ever accomplish.  Although most landowners and the sportsmen we worked with didn't like the agency per se, they pretty much trusted us and were behind our efforts.  Why, because we were there for them and our word meant something.  Unfortunately reorganization ended the program as powers to be just before and after I retired felt biologist don't get their hands dirty.  That is for techs or ag. assisitants, of which there were none.  Makes sense huh....lol.  Biologists should be thinkers and meeting attendants.  What a bunch of crap.

Restructure and get rid of many mid management and higher level jobs in headquarters, and regional offices along with some bogus field positions that do nothing and then fund management staffing levels that actually need it.  In summary it's doubtful things will ever change or evolve back to what should be.  That pretty much comes from the top and for years not only the Director, but the Commissiion as well, has failed miserably.  Rant over.........   

[lokidog]