IMPORTANT POLL: Does WDFW Appreciate and Listen to Hunters & Anglers?

[JDHasty]

I put no and will qualify that. I've been very pleased with any communications I've had with LE, Biologists, and Hunter Education. I'm extremely dissatisfied with response from Administration regarding predator and other game issues.

Agree 100% with this.  Every interaction I have had at the "hands on" level have been top notch, I think there are some really good people trying to do good things within the confines of a horribly screwed up state run department.

Agree 100% with that statement

[ctwiggs1]

I put no and will qualify that. I've been very pleased with any communications I've had with LE, Biologists, and Hunter Education. I'm extremely dissatisfied with response from Administration regarding predator and other game issues.

Agree 100% with this.  Every interaction I have had at the "hands on" level have been top notch, I think there are some really good people trying to do good things within the confines of a horribly screwed up state run department.

Agree 100% with that statement

   I've had great interactions with GWs, Bios, and the regional office's when I've stopped in.  All of the problems at WDFW seem to come from Olympia.  They have the same problem WSP has - great people with miserable leadership.

[pianoman9701]

How about we do away with WDFW getting any general funds.  I bet they listen to those that pay the bill then.  Commercial fishers, birders, etc. can pay their fair share if they want to continue receiving services.

Never happen. They want more from the general fund and less from us so they can justify pandering to the wolf huggers and the patchouli crowd.

[WSU]

How about we do away with WDFW getting any general funds.  I bet they listen to those that pay the bill then.  Commercial fishers, birders, etc. can pay their fair share if they want to continue receiving services.

Never happen. They want more from the general fund and less from us so they can justify pandering to the wolf huggers and the patchouli crowd.

I agree, but the Leg. is fed up with them and turned down their request for a fee increase.  I know it's extremely unlikely and would be harmful to some programs, but I honestly oppose any increase in general funds until WDFW (and those in the leg that hold the purse strings, COUGH, coastal caucus) figure out who really is footing the bill and who needs to be paid attention to.

[JDHasty]

Looks like Jim Unsworth took time to stop by HW and cast his vote. 

[skeeter 20i]

Looks like Jim Unsworth took time to stop by HW and cast his vote.

 

[Stein]

Last year, I had an interaction with an officer as well as several guys that run the waterfowl access program.  When I had a problem or two, they got it fixed and were working pretty hard to make the system better.

It was I that cast the lone vote

[pianoman9701]

How about we do away with WDFW getting any general funds.  I bet they listen to those that pay the bill then.  Commercial fishers, birders, etc. can pay their fair share if they want to continue receiving services.

Never happen. They want more from the general fund and less from us so they can justify pandering to the wolf huggers and the patchouli crowd.

I agree, but the Leg. is fed up with them and turned down their request for a fee increase.  I know it's extremely unlikely and would be harmful to some programs, but I honestly oppose any increase in general funds until WDFW (and those in the leg that hold the purse strings, COUGH, coastal caucus) figure out who really is footing the bill and who needs to be paid attention to.

Just ask the Governor's office. He's the one appointing the Defenders of Wildlife and HSUS to the wildlife commission.

[bobcat]

Overall I believe they only like us for the revenue we provide. They give preference to Native Americans and predators, and would prefer to end hunting if doing so didn't eliminate the justification for many of the WDFW jobs.

[Bob33]

It takes a broad brush to characterize WDFW as not appreciating or listening to hunters and anglers. Without batting an eye I could name ten or more WDFW employees that genuinely care about hunters. Unfortunately, with a wee bit more time I could name off quite a few WDFW employees whom I would consider at best as being ambivalent about hunters, and they range from the highest to the lowest ranks of the organization. It’s unfortunate that the good ones are lumped in with the bad ones.

[dscubame]

With these poll results it is apparent WDFW has a perception and PR issue.  Surprising, NOT.

[CAMPMEAT]

Get rid of Conservation Northwest who runs the WDFW. That's the problem and any other environmental group who holds lawsuits over their heads.

[bigtex]

How about we do away with WDFW getting any general funds.  I bet they listen to those that pay the bill then.  Commercial fishers, birders, etc. can pay their fair share if they want to continue receiving services.

Never happen. They want more from the general fund and less from us so they can justify pandering to the wolf huggers and the patchouli crowd.

I agree, but the Leg. is fed up with them and turned down their request for a fee increase.  I know it's extremely unlikely and would be harmful to some programs, but I honestly oppose any increase in general funds until WDFW (and those in the leg that hold the purse strings, COUGH, coastal caucus) figure out who really is footing the bill and who needs to be paid attention to.

The legislature in the recently approved 2017-19 budget provided a one-time increase in general fund monies. This was largely due to Senator Pearson. According to Pearson this is a one-time increase meant to soften the blow with the lack of funds coming from license revenue. Pearson has ordered WDFW to figure out a funding structure which will satisfy both outdoorsmen and the legislators.

[JDHasty]

With these poll results it is apparent WDFW has a perception and PR issue.  Surprising, NOT.

It doesn't impress me that WDFW has across the board perception and PR issues.  What I am inclined to believe is that WDFW Administration is seen as being less than trustworthy and from that is not a perception and PR issue.  That is a personnel issue. 

Experience leads me to believe that most sportsmen trust and respect WDFW field staff and biologists, but that trust and respect rapidly diminishes once you get above a certain level until by the time you get to the upper levels it is practically non-existent.     

[Hunter4Life]

I voted no, but as a lot of other have said, you can't paint everyone in WDFW with the same brush.  I do not believe the higher-ups care one lick or appreciate those who hunt or fish, but those in the field are very good and very dedicated people.  Those in Enforcement, the Bios, the lunch bucket people working hard at 40 hours a week trying to make a living are great people.  I will never say a negative word about those people.