Well worth reading the actual letter from the Budget and Policy Advisory Group members before digging in on the proposed fee increase:
https://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2018/08/aug1718_E_budget.pdfGreater opportunity and effective conservation require investment, especially in a diverse and growing state like this one. Compared to the price of one-day lift tickets, green fees or even gas and beer prices, annual combo licenses are still a steal. Our fish and wildlife are well worth the additional cost of an eighteen rack or a quarter tank in the truck.
Letter content:
Date: August 15, 2018
To: Chair Smith; Vice Chair Carpenter; Commissioners Baker, Graybill, Holzmiller, Kehoe, McIsaac,
and Thorburn
Cc: State Legislators
Dear Commissioners:
As leaders in fish and wildlife conservation representing hunting, fishing, outdoor recreation, nature
conservation, working lands, and local government interests, we write to urge you to revisit the
resolution you passed Saturday to request a 5% fee increase. That amount is far less then just the effect
of inflation since the last (2011) fee increase and we fear will be frowned upon by legislators and force
the Department into cuts that will harm our interests and our state’s natural resources.
We are among the members of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Department’s (WDFW)
Budget and Policy Advisory Group, convened in response to a June 2017 budget proviso obligating the
Department to scrutinize its operating and financial practices. We speak here not as an official WDFW
advisory group, but as leaders of our respective organizations and constituencies. We are bringing our
diverse interests together here to draw attention to the unprecedented risk to Washington’s fish and
wildlife and essential habitat, and also to project the unprecedented unity of intention shown by our
diverse groups joining together.
What we have learned together is substantial and unanticipated. We share here highlights of our
acquired understanding in hope of bolstering your appreciation for the Department, its increasingly
important mission, and its role in stewarding our wildlife and habitat. These resources are a wellspring
for Washington’s economy and quality of life, today and tomorrow.
The Department is efficient, comparing well with wildlife agencies in other states. Some believe that
WDFW is not delivering sufficient impact for the resources awarded it, and that perhaps even some
fiscal malfeasance contributed to its 2017 budget shortfall. The proviso directed the Department to
undertake an evaluation by an outside management consultant; the results of that audit (
https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/budget/proviso/matrix_wdfw_final_report_1-11-18.pdf) should retire
the undeserved assumptions or allegations. WDFW’s management was not the cause of its budget
shortfall and appropriate funding should be restored.
The Department’s mission reflects the public interest served, but its budget does not. We fully
embrace its mission To preserve, protect and perpetuate fish, wildlife and ecosystems while providing
sustainable fish and wildlife recreational and commercial opportunities. Fulfilling this mandate for the
incredible diversity of fish, wildlife and outdoor experiences of our state is a unique challenge currently
not supported by adequate funding from the legislature.
Expenditures say more than words, and the disproportionate spending shown in the below graphic is
instructive. We hope to correct a perception that the Department’s work on diversity (non-game)
conservation and non-consumptive recreation is subsidized by sportsmen and sportswomen. WDFW
license proceeds from (and expenditures on) hunting and fishing are significant, as are federal grants
tied to excise taxes on fishing tackle, guns and ammunition. In comparison to those, spending on diversity and recreation pales. More to the point, spending on diversity and recreation also pales compared to general fund appropriations to WDFW, which are a fitting expression of taxpayer interest in the health and enjoyment of natural resources. We call on the legislature to improve the balance between these revenue sources—allowing the Department to increase sorely needed funding for wildlife conservation and outdoor recreation while providing ample hunting and fishing opportunity, consistent
with its diverse mission.
The Department confronts extraordinary challenges that warrant support. Over and above the
demands on its peer agencies, WDFW manages endangered salmon and other anadromous fisheries,
treaty obligations, species and habitat ranging from coastal rainforests to high deserts, and other
demands making the WDFW mission extraordinarily complex. Compared to other Western states,
Washington is the smallest, has the least amount of public land, and its human population is among the
densest and fastest-growing, impacting the ability to provide abundant fish, wildlife, and recreational
access. Most of the population lives in watersheds that drain into Puget Sound, where our southernresident
killer whales face extinction along with their primary food: Chinook salmon. Imperiled species
from lynx to sharp-tailed grouse require substantial recovery attention. The return of wolves has
compounded the staff’s workload. Ungulate herds, while generally stable, are tenuous in certain
localities, with growing concerns ranging from elk hoof disease to shrinking mule deer winter range to
declines in moose and mountain caribou populations to crop damage from wildlife foraging. Our fish and
wildlife resources and recreation opportunities are struggling because of the Department’s immense
challenges, not its shortcomings. The world is changing, and WDFW must be given the resources to
evolve to meet these diverse current challenges.
Failure harms not just the agency, but also the state. We the people of the Evergreen State are
renowned for our love of nature’s beauty and bounty, which rely upon the health of our ecosystems and
therefore on WDFW’s success. The outcomes effect not just our Washington identity and lifestyle, but
also our economy and health. To pursue fish, wildlife, and inspiration, we depart cities to spend
hundreds of millions of dollars in areas like La Push, Ilwaco, Wapato, Wauconda, and Chewelah. As salmon deliver ocean nutrients to upland soil, we thus distribute the riches of our modern economy. The taxes on these expenditures then flow to Olympia, from which they are dribbled out to WDFW. While WDFW received $94M in GF-S for this biennium, a Department of Revenue report published in August of 2016 estimated that its work, leveraged with other Department fund sources, will generate $340M in GF-S, a fiscal return on state investment greater than 350%. The declining trend of Department funding
as a share of the state budget risks these lifestyle and economic benefits.
We care, and we’re coming together for change. While WDFW’s diverse stakeholders at times have
competing interests, we share a common need for a strong WDFW to provide healthy and diverse
wildlife and a full range of opportunities to enjoy it. We are now determined to work together in
support of the Department, lest we lose our heritage. The proviso directed the Department to evaluate
options for cuts. Department Staff earnestly complied, but we members of the Budget and Policy
Advisory Group are gravely concerned about the level of cuts being suggested. To succeed, the
Department requires over $60 million above its present funding (not including expected orca needs), half
to fix the shortfall created by the legislature in the last biennium and half to invest in the future by
helping correct inequities and the damage caused by a decade of underfunding. This is a huge goal that
is only likely to be achieved if its weight is shared. Our belief is that an appropriate breakdown is for at
least 25% ($15M) to be covered by increased fees, challenging the Legislature to pass that fee bill and
match it threefold from the General Fund. Perhaps a combination of a modest surcharge and modest fee
increase (plus CSSE) would avoid hitting too heavily on either end of the customer spectrum. Any less
than 25% risks a response from the Legislature that could leave the department underfunded, impose
yet higher fees on sportsmen and women, or both. Strong leadership from the Commission is our best
chance for success. We also commit to working in the legislature to not only pass the fee bill that you
approve, but to assure this funding is new to the natural resources portion of the state budget, not
reallocated from other natural resource or environmental appropriations.
WDFW has been blamed for the consequences of its own victimization and factors beyond its control.
We stakeholders are guilty of that, as is the Legislature. The BPAG process is worthwhile for having
educated us all to the Department’s competencies, efficiencies, and vital services upon which we all rely
going forward. We must remedy the failures of the past by providing the Department the means to
successfully steward the resources all Washingtonians value and require.
