Inslee Seeks to Increase Salmon Enforcement & Natural Resource Prosecution

[Scruffy]

Never trust a wolf in sheep's clothing.  He is not looking out for the hunting and fishing communities by prosecuting "criminals"  The criminals are us they want to prosecute.  The anti's probably put him up to this like it is a good thing only to use it against us.  The more hunting and fishing privilege's they can take means less support for hunting and fishing, dwindling our numbers further.  I think all sportsmen try to follow the rules but we aren't perfect and people make mistakes.  These are the people they will prosecute that a normal prosecutor wouldn't waste their time with.  just my  but be careful patting King Inslee on the back....

[huntnphool]

But if a prosecuter won't pick up a case ,it usually has something to due with lack of evidence.

Not entirely true. There's counties, especially the more populated ones, who will hardly prosecute any fish and wildlife cases simply because they don't have the staffing. Many counties don't even have enough prosecutors to prosecute "people vs people" crime as it is.

When officers submit cases to a prosecutors office and the case is rejected the prosecutor will explain why they won't prosecute. Lack of prosecutorial resources is often the most cited reason.

 Interesting that you make excuses for lack of prosecution for F&W offenses, yet ignore real crime prosecution!

 And let me be clear BT, I’m not advocating F&W offenses...just pointing out the hypocrisy!

[hunter399]

But if a prosecuter won't pick up a case ,it usually has something to due with lack of evidence.

Not entirely true. There's counties, especially the more populated ones, who will hardly prosecute any fish and wildlife cases simply because they don't have the staffing. Many counties don't even have enough prosecutors to prosecute "people vs people" crime as it is.

When officers submit cases to a prosecutors office and the case is rejected the prosecutor will explain why they won't prosecute. Lack of prosecutorial resources is often the most cited reason.

 Interesting that you make excuses for lack of prosecution for F&W offenses, yet ignore real crime prosecution!

 And let me be clear BT, I’m not advocating F&W offenses...just pointing out the hypocrisy!

The AG should pick up a few extra cases without funding.
I'd rather have more enforcement on the ground,finding people that are guilty of wildlife crime,then giving our AG any money.
AG
Governer
Losers

[bigtex]

But if a prosecuter won't pick up a case ,it usually has something to due with lack of evidence.

Not entirely true. There's counties, especially the more populated ones, who will hardly prosecute any fish and wildlife cases simply because they don't have the staffing. Many counties don't even have enough prosecutors to prosecute "people vs people" crime as it is.

When officers submit cases to a prosecutors office and the case is rejected the prosecutor will explain why they won't prosecute. Lack of prosecutorial resources is often the most cited reason.

 Interesting that you make excuses for lack of prosecution for F&W offenses, yet ignore real crime prosecution!

 And let me be clear BT, I’m not advocating F&W offenses...just pointing out the hypocrisy!

Actually I've always said there needs to be more prosecutors in the state to handle crime in general, which just about every LEO in the state would agree with. In fact I've said numerous times on this site that there should be a proportionate amount of LEOs to prosecutors in each county. The more LEOs you have the more prosecutors you have.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[hunter399]

But if a prosecuter won't pick up a case ,it usually has something to due with lack of evidence.

Not entirely true. There's counties, especially the more populated ones, who will hardly prosecute any fish and wildlife cases simply because they don't have the staffing. Many counties don't even have enough prosecutors to prosecute "people vs people" crime as it is.

When officers submit cases to a prosecutors office and the case is rejected the prosecutor will explain why they won't prosecute. Lack of prosecutorial resources is often the most cited reason.

 Interesting that you make excuses for lack of prosecution for F&W offenses, yet ignore real crime prosecution!

 And let me be clear BT, I’m not advocating F&W offenses...just pointing out the hypocrisy!

Actually I've always said there needs to be more prosecutors in the state to handle crime in general, which just about every LEO in the state would agree with. In fact I've said numerous times on this site that there should be a proportionate amount of LEOs to prosecutors in each county. The more LEOs you have the more prosecutors you have.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Ya I kinda figured that was coming. What's the point in finding someone guilty of anything if no one prosecutes.
I'll ask a question though .......
What do you believe is the number 1 wildlife crime that prosecutors drop the most.
Littering
No liences
Poaching
Hunting at nite
ECT,ECT,ECT.
Two part question.
How many cases a year are truly dropped in a year.no fine,nothing.
I mean dropped from the face of earth like it never happened.

I'm not expecting hard numbers ,just your best guess ,so us here on HW can get a feel for what may be going on.

[HillHound]

Try to bust the guys fishing while let the people breaking their windows out walk free

[JimmyHoffa]

Try to bust the guys fishing while let the people breaking their windows out walk free

Also read as...bust the guys that vote against him, free the ones that vote for him.

[pianoman9701]

The WDFW has 40+ job openings available. Many are due to attrition from the mandate and from the lack of prosecution for serious wildlife offenses. King Inslee should end the state workers' mandates and allocate more money to the prosecutors to make sure maximum penalties for these crimes are levied. Covid is over. We have the laws and the penalties. Now, let's enforce them. We have experienced LE who've been forced out. Hire them back.

[RB]

Inslee announced his supplemental budget request for 2022 this week. His budget for WDFW includes:

-Funding for three new WDFW Officer positions focused on salmon fisheries enforcement.
-Funding one new WDFW Law Enforcement Captain position to serve as a liaison with NOAA/NMFS, tribes, and bordering states on fisheries enforcement issues
-Providing funding to WDFW who will in-turn provide the funding to the WA Attorney General's Office for funding the equivalent of 2.5 Assistant Attorney Generals to prosecute cases natural resource cases which are declined by county prosecutors.

The prosecutor funding is an interesting one. Under the state Fish & Wildlife Code if a county prosecutor fails to charge someone with a fish and wildlife offense WDFW can then ask the WA AG to file charges. Now typically this is done in rare cases. However, in the budget request the funding will be used by the "Attorney General’s Office to prosecute hundreds of environmental crimes turned away by county prosecutors each year due to lack of resources." Personally, I think this is a great move and should be supported by anyone who wants to see fish and wildlife violators actually penalized.

As for the funding for this, all three funding proposals are funded by the General Fund (taxes) and not WDFW license dollars.

If this helps prosecute offenders it will be a great thing! How many times have wee seen the headline of a poacher with a trunk load of fish and nothing really happens. Those that know how to manipulate the law and know they will not be prosecuted are more likely to re-offend, but once the law is actually enforced and these poachers start to feel the affects it should slow them down quite a bit.   

[duckmen1]

One can stand down along the bank in one spot at Minter creek during the chum run and within 10 minutes you could write 20 plus tickets. Do that daily during the whole season and imagine the amount of income the state could get.

[furbearer365]

I am 100 percent for enforcement, in other states I actually enjoy seeing Wardens and will go out of my way to converse with them. But in this crap hole of a state with all its idiotic laws, i dont trust for one second that The King is looking out for any hunter/fisherman's interest or the well being of our game.   If anything, I bet hes loading up on Wardens so he can pass more laws with less hunting and fishing, and using the new "additions" to enforce it. He is a scum bag that I personally will never trust

[Pinetar]

I am 100 percent for enforcement, in other states I actually enjoy seeing Wardens and will go out of my way to converse with them. But in this crap hole of a state with all its idiotic laws, i dont trust for one second that The King is looking out for any hunter/fisherman's interest or the well bring of our game.   If anything, I bet hes loading up on Wardens so he can pass more laws with less hunting and fishing, and using the new "additions" to enforce it. He is a scum bag that I personally will never trust

  100%

[hunter399]

If enforcement needs prosecutors to fight wildlife crimes.
Then it sounds 👍

[huntnphool]

But if a prosecuter won't pick up a case ,it usually has something to due with lack of evidence.

Not entirely true. There's counties, especially the more populated ones, who will hardly prosecute any fish and wildlife cases simply because they don't have the staffing. Many counties don't even have enough prosecutors to prosecute "people vs people" crime as it is.

When officers submit cases to a prosecutors office and the case is rejected the prosecutor will explain why they won't prosecute. Lack of prosecutorial resources is often the most cited reason.

 Interesting that you make excuses for lack of prosecution for F&W offenses, yet ignore real crime prosecution!

 And let me be clear BT, I’m not advocating F&W offenses...just pointing out the hypocrisy!

Actually I've always said there needs to be more prosecutors in the state to handle crime in general, which just about every LEO in the state would agree with. In fact I've said numerous times on this site that there should be a proportionate amount of LEOs to prosecutors in each county. The more LEOs you have the more prosecutors you have.

 Increasing the number of prosecutors is pointless if they are told to not prosecute. We are seeing this same scenario unfold all across the country in blue states.

[chukarchaser]

It's idiotic to think that adding to the AG's office will not in turn be weaponized against hunters& fishing.