HB 2859 Would Break-Up WDFW Into Two Agencies

[bigtex]

Background: In 1994 WDFW was created after a voter initiative was passed that merged the Dept. of Fisheries with the Dept. of Wildlife.

HB 2859 sponsored by Rep. Walsh (R) would essentially take us back the early 1990s and split WDFW into the Department of Fisheries, and the Department of Wildlife. You will essentially have one agency managing wildlife, and another managing fisheries.

http://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2859&Year=2017

[Rainier10]

I would love to hear your thoughts on this Bigtex.

For me it just seems like it would be more to have two departments and there already isn't enough money.

[KFhunter]

BT is against this bill.

I want to see WDFW broke up, I don't see where things have gotten better since 1994

[trophyhunt]

What are the pro’s and con’s?

[Karl Blanchard]

Unless there is a change in how these agencies are funded, then all I see happening here is creating more government bureaucracy.   

[KFhunter]

Unless there is a change in how these agencies are funded, then all I see happening here is creating more government bureaucracy.   

and it all leads back to our beloved governor inslee

[Karl Blanchard]

If there is going to be any split up I want to see a department of sport fish and game. We need a government agency that manages Sportsman and the game that we pursue. I want my license dollars to fuel the machine that drives us all NOT the general fund.  Let the bunny huggers fund blue bird boxes and the like.

[KFhunter]

Fish is easy, game is harder - so they tend to focus on the cash cow of fish and ignore game.  With a break up the game side couldn't just ignore game and focus on shellfish.

[KFhunter]

If there is going to be any split up I want to see a department of sport fish and game. We need a government agency that manages Sportsman and the game that we pursue. I want my license dollars to fuel the machine that drives us all NOT the general fund.  Let the bunny huggers fund blue bird boxes and the like.

WDFW focuses on all animals, not just ones we hunt.  A dept of Game would focus on game, while a dept of fish would focus on sport fish, historically anyways. 

Nothing to say that it will go back to that, we could end up with a dept of wildlife...err wait 

[bigtex]

I would love to hear your thoughts on this Bigtex.

For me it just seems like it would be more to have two departments and there already isn't enough money.

There's a reason why most states now have a combined Fish & Wildlife agency, in fact many are now moving towards a merger with F&W with Parks. It comes down to streamlining.

If you split DOW and DOF you would essentially need two of everything, two directors, regional offices for fisheries and regional offices for wildlife, licensing staff for fisheries and licensing staff for wildlife, an enforcement program for wildlife and an enforcement program for fisheries. That's how it was handled before the creation of WDFW, and looking at the legislation that's how it would be moving forward. Right now those things are combined.

Then lets look at money/funding. Historically, Fisheries was full of $ and Wildlife was poor. The reason being Wildlife was funded solely by license fees and Fisheries by tax dollars. The bill doesn't really go into what the funding would look like. We will have to wait a little while until the "fiscal note" comes out which will essentially lay out the cost of the bill.

I think many on here will vote in favor of this bill because they don't like the current management of wildlife, well what guarantees do we have that it will change if the agency splits?

Realistically, this bill is dead on arrival. With just one sponsor, especially just one R in a democrat controlled House.

[Karl Blanchard]

If there is going to be any split up I want to see a department of sport fish and game. We need a government agency that manages Sportsman and the game that we pursue. I want my license dollars to fuel the machine that drives us all NOT the general fund.  Let the bunny huggers fund blue bird boxes and the like.

WDFW focuses on all animals, not just ones we hunt.  A dept of Game would focus on game, while a dept of fish would focus on sport fish, historically anyways. 

Nothing to say that it will go back to that, we could end up with a dept of wildlife...err wait

that's my whole point. We won't end up with a Department of Game, we will have a Department of Wildlife. It literally changes nothing except we will have to add additional infrastructure to cater to the two different departments.

[northwesthunter84]

I know its just a name thing, (and a little off topic), for several states but I think their policies relate. These states combine game and fish with DNR, and they are treated as public resources, rightly so.  The agency manages other wildlife but focuses on game/fish and sportsmen.

[Rainier10]

I would love to hear your thoughts on this Bigtex.

For me it just seems like it would be more to have two departments and there already isn't enough money.

There's a reason why most states now have a combined Fish & Wildlife agency, in fact many are now moving towards a merger with F&W with Parks. It comes down to streamlining.

If you split DOW and DOF you would essentially need two of everything, two directors, regional offices for fisheries and regional offices for wildlife, licensing staff for fisheries and licensing staff for wildlife, an enforcement program for wildlife and an enforcement program for fisheries. That's how it was handled before the creation of WDFW, and looking at the legislation that's how it would be moving forward. Right now those things are combined.

Then lets look at money/funding. Historically, Fisheries was full of $ and Wildlife was poor. The reason being Wildlife was funded solely by license fees and Fisheries by tax dollars. The bill doesn't really go into what the funding would look like. We will have to wait a little while until the "fiscal note" comes out which will essentially lay out the cost of the bill.

I think many on here will vote in favor of this bill because they don't like the current management of wildlife, well what guarantees do we have that it will change if the agency splits?

Realistically, this bill is dead on arrival. With just one sponsor, especially just one R in a democrat controlled House.

Sounds like we are on the same page.  I am frustrated as well but don't want to cut off my nose to spite my face kind of thing.  Money is already thin, two of everything just costs more money, not to mention all the rebranding.

[KFhunter]

Instead of one screwed up agency we could have two!

[Machias]

Game Agencies all across American have always been very envious of the Missouri Department of Conservation.  Many years ago they passed a conservation sales tax.   The conservation sales tax more than pays for itself. The 1/8 of 1 percent sales tax returns almost five times the dollars in state and local taxes alone.  The MDC is one of the best funded Departments in the US....or at least they used to be.  Might be something to consider for this state and it's funding for Fish and Game.

[JimmyHoffa]

Instead of one screwed up agency we could have two!

Yeah, the fishing crowd kind of tempers down the make up of the commission.  If there were two commissions, you wouldn't get the fishermen that are part time hunters on there.  Probably more CNW, DoW, Sierra Clubbers.

[timberfaller]

"Instead of one screwed up agency we could have two!" 

BUT one would NOT get any of the Pittman/Robertson money!!!

[Boss .300 winmag]

Game Agencies all across American have always been very envious of the Missouri Department of Conservation.  Many years ago they passed a conservation sales tax.   The conservation sales tax more than pays for itself. The 1/8 of 1 percent sales tax returns almost five times the dollars in state and local taxes alone.  The MDC is one of the best funded Departments in the US....or at least they used to be.  Might be something to consider for this state and it's funding for Fish and Game.

Now that’s a tax I could get behind, if it all went to WDFW. But hey who am kidding it all go to wolf, cougar, coyote, and bear recovery.

[B4noon]

If we had a Game department with game being the focus there is a way to bring in additional funding through enforcement violations.  These now go through the local courts and get tossed due to lack of bench time with all the domestics and driving infractions courts are back logged beyond their ability plus when restitution is paid it doesn't go straight to the agency.  If we create a fish and wildlife court system which would handle only fish and game violations not only would they get prosecuted instead of tossed  which would lower the offense rate when they are found guilty make them write the check back to the agency to pay not only the court cost but the cost to the resource.

[bigmacc]

I agree with Karl Blanchard, I know I have sounded like a broken record in numerous other posts stating the whole reason things are screwed up in this state or at least a big reason is because its not the "GAME DEPARTMENT" anymore, I go back to the 60,s when I started hunting, my history is mostly in the Methow, but our "game"was the priority. Since they became WDFW the actual "game animals"are not a top priority as they were, too many irons in the fire, too many special interest groups to cater to etc. etc. We need a GAME DEPARTMENT again to represent the GAME that we pursue and pay license fees etc. for...

[CAMPMEAT]

The WDFW can't keep their lies straight now, how will 2 agencies be able to do that. Sealions need to be shot, just like wolves do.

[police women of America]

If we had a Game department with game being the focus there is a way to bring in additional funding through enforcement violations.  These now go through the local courts and get tossed due to lack of bench time with all the domestics and driving infractions courts are back logged beyond their ability plus when restitution is paid it doesn't go straight to the agency.  If we create a fish and wildlife court system which would handle only fish and game violations not only would they get prosecuted instead of tossed  which would lower the offense rate when they are found guilty make them write the check back to the agency to pay not only the court cost but the cost to the resource.

Great point. They could make so much more money if there was a more effective way to prosecute poachers. And maybe then they'd actually be deterred from doing it. Although I am a little weary about DFW having their own kind of court system, but I guess it would be fine as long as it was only for fines.