WDFW $$$ figures on bird watchers

[Ghost Hunter]

Just seen a WDFW post on the millions of dollars wildlife watchers putting into WA economy.  Looks like hunters are a drop in the bucket.

[Humptulips]

 How much do they put into the Department budget? General funds, does that pay for all of non-game, more, less?

[buckfvr]

Just seen a WDFW post on the millions of dollars wildlife watchers putting into WA economy.  Looks like hunters are a drop in the bucket.

Doesnt mean a dang bit of it is true.  Misinformation is simply weaponized lying.

[blackdog]

https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/administration/budget/operating

[hughjorgan]

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’ve never encountered anyone out and about looking at birds or any other wildlife, unless it was other hunters. The figures they come up with are trash while trying to marginalize what comes from us as hunters. As I see it the wildlife watchers and the numbers for their contribution seems like nothing more than propaganda.

[Bullkllr]

Sounds like a stretch.

If it was based on past surveys I've seen it probably includes everyone who answered 'yes' to questions like "Do you enjoy seeing birds?" and it probably counts any $$ spent on a vacation where someone reported"looking at birds" (like out the window on a highway) as part of the experience.

[Smokeploe]

Bird, wildlife watchers do not purchase anything except a discover pass if at all!  So I say they do not spend $1.00 compared to hunters, trappers and fishermen!  There is NO permit to watch wildlife!  The only thing they do is spout false and lies about hunters! They so not and should not have any say about hunting concerns!

Smokeploe

[pickardjw]

Got a link?

[KNOPHISH]

Ya sure, they spend millions donating to anti hunting activist groups.

[JimmyHoffa]

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’ve never encountered anyone out and about looking at birds or any other wildlife, unless it was other hunters. The figures they come up with are trash while trying to marginalize what comes from us as hunters. As I see it the wildlife watchers and the numbers for their contribution seems like nothing more than propaganda.

I see a handful around a few roadside wildlife areas.  Seems like the majority of interest is shorebirds and waterfowl, sometimes eagles. Can't say I have seen any of the birdwatchers get out of their cars.  They idle or drive 2 mph.  Probably don't contribute 1% of what the duck hunters for the same area do. 
It's kind of like the whale watchers, I'd guess not even close to what fisherman generate (even in current wdfw mismanagement).  Yet whale watching gets a ton of hype for economic contributions.

[hughjorgan]

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’ve never encountered anyone out and about looking at birds or any other wildlife, unless it was other hunters. The figures they come up with are trash while trying to marginalize what comes from us as hunters. As I see it the wildlife watchers and the numbers for their contribution seems like nothing more than propaganda.

I see a handful around a few roadside wildlife areas.  Seems like the majority of interest is shorebirds and waterfowl, sometimes eagles. Can't say I have seen any of the birdwatchers get out of their cars.  They idle or drive 2 mph.  Probably don't contribute 1% of what the duck hunters for the same area do. 
It's kind of like the whale watchers, I'd guess not even close to what fisherman generate (even in current wdfw mismanagement).  Yet whale watching gets a ton of hype for economic contributions.

Now we’re talking right. So we have a very small minority of the population that claims they put billions into the economy but how are they measuring this activity? What gear did they specifically buy? What gear do you need if you’re watching a bird from your kitchen window or from your idling car? Supposedly the recent survey done and presented at the last commission meeting says the majority of Washingtonians participate in wildlife watching from home.

“Nearly all wildlife watchers, over 99%, watch around the home, with fewer than 1% participating exclusively away from home.”

https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/02466/wdfw02466.pdf

So that begs the question of what exactly are they contributing? No way is that number 5.8 billion that they claim. I think we know their numbers are BS and your observations are spot on as well as what others have said in this thread. The math doesn’t math for any of their surveys.

[ducks4days]

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’ve never encountered anyone out and about looking at birds or any other wildlife, unless it was other hunters. The figures they come up with are trash while trying to marginalize what comes from us as hunters. As I see it the wildlife watchers and the numbers for their contribution seems like nothing more than propaganda.

I run into audobahn folks all the time, especially in the Skagit Valley where they come to look at swans and snow geese. If you bring a pair of binos into the blind you can watch them pull up and take a few photos of your decoy spread before realizing what it is and storming off.

[MR5x5]

This thread is worthless without the supposed numbers.

[Alan K]

Looks like spotting scopes, binoculars, cameras, and hiking equipment expenditures were all lumped into wildlife viewing...

I probably spend 4-5 times the days in the field during the rest of the year scouting as I do during the hunting seasons. I'd imagine they lumped those days into wildlife viewing, though it was FOR hunting purposes/preparation.

Hunting – The shooting or attempting to shoot wildlife with firearms or archery equipment. Hunting as defined by the Survey does not include occasions when an individual only participated in scouting or observing others hunt. 

 

Around-the-home wildlife watching – Activity within one mile of home with one of six primary purposes: (1) taking special interest in or trying to identify birds or other wildlife, (2) photographing wildlife, (3) feeding birdsor other wildlife, (4) maintaining natural areas of at least one-quarter acre for the benefit of wildlife, (5) maintaining plantings (such as shrubs and agricultural crops) for the benefit of wildlife,and (6) visiting parks and natural areas to observe, photograph, or feed wildlife.   

2) Who wouldn't grab their phone and take a pic of a deer raiding the flower beds?
3) I'd say at least 80% of the people I know have hummingbird feeders or bird houses.
4) I've got to think nearly any lot over 2-3 acres would meet that definition.
5) Wildlife benefit from free food in crops, so every farmer, hay producer, etc.

Away-from-home wildlife watching – Trips or outings at least one mile from home for the primary purpose of observing, photographing, or feeding wildlife. Trips to zoos, circuses, aquariums, and museums are not included.

Checking game cameras, maintaining mineral licks/bait piles?

Like most WDFW surveys, it seems they have an answer they want to get to and design a survey to produce the answers they want.  Shift dollars away from having been spent for hunting purposes to wildlife viewing, ignore hunting days directly (if not the one hunting), preparation days (scouting) and probably even include those scouting days in wildlife watching. 

[boneaddict]

I know a lot of bird watchers.   The Wenas is full of them as I type this.   I bet most don't have a discover pass.   What funds are they taking into account.   I film wildlife every fall and spend thousands, is that part of it.  What are they counting?   Straight up license revenue?  donations?   equipment cost? hotels, gas and local economies?   

[Twispriver]

I spend about twenty five bucks a month on patio mix bird seed if that counts

[hughjorgan]

This thread is worthless without the supposed numbers.

The link is posted, take a look at the numbers for your self.

[boneaddict]

Well, maybe its a different perspective......   How much money did I spend on hunting or fishing this last year.  Pretty close to zero dollars other than license and application fees.   I have all my gear, and I did not travel to hunt and sadly fish much.

How much did I spend on watching wildlife.......

Well, 16K for a new lens
5k for a new camera
another grand for a tripod
2k for another lens more for butterflies
put 8K on my truck just in Oct and Nov (14mpg at 4 bucks a gallon?)
Hotels, groceries etc.
This isn't taking anything into account for the spring.   

How is 2024 shaping up....
Zero dollars on hunting, zero dollars on fishing
bought a discover pass
Have spent three weekends hiking looking for rocks, and watching wildlife, all involved driving, maybe two tanks of fuel so far

pretty easy to skew some numbers

[MR5x5]

This thread is worthless without the supposed numbers.

The link is posted, take a look at the numbers for your self.

Got it.  Did not realize that was the link....

So...  the report is not a "Hunting/Fishing vs Bird Watching" fight at all, it simply an assessment of where funding comes from in consideration of certain activity types.  Broadly those types are Hunting/Fishing and Watching wildlife, with watching wildlife broadly encompassing anybody who sees a creature from their kitchen to taking part in any outdoor activity where you can claim to enjoy wildlife.  From their it considers all costs associated, i.e. from home bird feed to backpacks to lodging, fuel and all other gear associated with getting outside.  The conclusion of the report is to tout the importance of wildlife to all peoples of the state.  Seems like a good thing to me...

Turning this into another version of the sate against hunting/fishing seems misguided.

[jackelope]

I know a lot of bird watchers.   The Wenas is full of them as I type this.   I bet most don't have a discover pass.   What funds are they taking into account.   I film wildlife every fall and spend thousands, is that part of it.  What are they counting?   Straight up license revenue?  donations?   equipment cost? hotels, gas and local economies?

The original post talks about money going into the WA economy. Doesn’t say WDFW.
The Wenas is full of bird watchers right now. Pretty sure WA is a destination state as a whole for birdwatchers. So yeah, I’d read that like you. Fuel, hotels, restaurants, groceries, etc.

[jackelope]

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’ve never encountered anyone out and about looking at birds or any other wildlife, unless it was other hunters. The figures they come up with are trash while trying to marginalize what comes from us as hunters. As I see it the wildlife watchers and the numbers for their contribution seems like nothing more than propaganda.

You’re probably not in the same places as the bird watchers.

[Ghost Hunter]

Looks like spotting scopes, binoculars, cameras, and hiking equipment expenditures were all lumped into wildlife viewing...

I probably spend 4-5 times the days in the field during the rest of the year scouting as I do during the hunting seasons. I'd imagine they lumped those days into wildlife viewing, though it was FOR hunting purposes/preparation.

Hunting – The shooting or attempting to shoot wildlife with firearms or archery equipment. Hunting as defined by the Survey does not include occasions when an individual only participated in scouting or observing others hunt. 

 

Around-the-home wildlife watching – Activity within one mile of home with one of six primary purposes: (1) taking special interest in or trying to identify birds or other wildlife, (2) photographing wildlife, (3) feeding birdsor other wildlife, (4) maintaining natural areas of at least one-quarter acre for the benefit of wildlife, (5) maintaining plantings (such as shrubs and agricultural crops) for the benefit of wildlife,and (6) visiting parks and natural areas to observe, photograph, or feed wildlife.   

2) Who wouldn't grab their phone and take a pic of a deer raiding the flower beds?
3) I'd say at least 80% of the people I know have hummingbird feeders or bird houses.
4) I've got to think nearly any lot over 2-3 acres would meet that definition.
5) Wildlife benefit from free food in crops, so every farmer, hay producer, etc.

Away-from-home wildlife watching – Trips or outings at least one mile from home for the primary purpose of observing, photographing, or feeding wildlife. Trips to zoos, circuses, aquariums, and museums are not included.

Checking game cameras, maintaining mineral licks/bait piles?

Like most WDFW surveys, it seems they have an answer they want to get to and design a survey to produce the answers they want.  Shift dollars away from having been spent for hunting purposes to wildlife viewing, ignore hunting days directly (if not the one hunting), preparation days (scouting) and probably even include those scouting days in wildlife watching. 

   Twist it for your agenda.  Looks like I have a lifetime spending thousands of dollars on optics and other gear for wildlife watching, all in the disguise of it being used for hunting.  For example, last year I drove 2 trips to Wyoming to spend 6 weeks and only brought home one elk.  So, one day elk hunting and the remainder watching fish, beavers, birds, coyotes, antelope, deer, elk, moose, etc.  Makes it much more cost effective explaining what I spent for meat.     Same for 7 round trips from home to NE corner of state and my wildlife viewing there, just to bring home one deer.  Good thing I don't do much for bird hunting.  I'm sure each and every one of us have contributed to these statistics.   

[Ghost Hunter]

Guestbook from here would be a good starter for stats.

https://ridgefieldfriends.org/

[JimmyHoffa]

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’ve never encountered anyone out and about looking at birds or any other wildlife, unless it was other hunters. The figures they come up with are trash while trying to marginalize what comes from us as hunters. As I see it the wildlife watchers and the numbers for their contribution seems like nothing more than propaganda.

You’re probably not in the same places as the bird watchers.

I'm right next to a little county park.  Maybe once a week some birder group might take a stroll.  Maybe a couple birders daily go to the adjacent national wildlife refuge.
But back when it was a pheasant release area, I think it had about 75-80 hunters each hunting morning plus dogs.  Probably another 25 filtering later through the day.  People joke about deer season being the pumpkin patch, but pheasant release areas were even wilder.  So many people and many driving in from about 50 miles.
I hardly see any birders on the coastal beaches, but go to the same beach when clamming is open and you'll see huge crowds.

[jackelope]

All this time wasted on the forum and we’re missing the Sandhill crane festival in othello this weekend. Tours at $60 a seat, have to register, buses(fuel) for shuttling people, lectures, etc.  Lots of people.

Snow geese up in Skagit county? Tons of people!

Ever been to the Skagit to see the eagles when the chums are rotting? I have once. Skagit Eagle Festival? Crap tons of people up there all spending money on food, souvenirs, fuel,
Etc.

Google “ocean shores snowy owls”. Lots of people go there specifically for the owls.


I live right next to Cherry Valley in Duvall. Very popular pheasant release site. Also for bird watching. There’s even a tower for it. It doesn’t get corked full of people bird watching, but it happens.

I totally get the point you guys are trying to make, but to say that people don’t put a lot of money into the WA economy bird watching tells me some of you are missing something. And I’m not a bird watcher so I’m sure there are other cool bird events or things people come here for. They’re all spending money.

[jackelope]

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’ve never encountered anyone out and about looking at birds or any other wildlife, unless it was other hunters. The figures they come up with are trash while trying to marginalize what comes from us as hunters. As I see it the wildlife watchers and the numbers for their contribution seems like nothing more than propaganda.

You’re probably not in the same places as the bird watchers.

I'm right next to a little county park.  Maybe once a week some birder group might take a stroll.  Maybe a couple birders daily go to the adjacent national wildlife refuge.
But back when it was a pheasant release area, I think it had about 75-80 hunters each hunting morning plus dogs.  Probably another 25 filtering later through the day.  People joke about deer season being the pumpkin patch, but pheasant release areas were even wilder.  So many people and many driving in from about 50 miles.
I hardly see any birders on the coastal beaches, but go to the same beach when clamming is open and you'll see huge crowds.

I think a lot of the birding stuff is migration based, so timing plays a part.

What are we saying here exactly? The first post says wa bird watchers put millions of dollars into the WA economy. What about that is hard to believe?

[boneaddict]

Be a follower of some of the birding groups on Facebook.  Yikes....  WAY more active year along than hunting groups are even during peak seasons.   

Short eared owls is a big one, Blue birds in the Wenas and its not even peak season. I'm probably taking my mom up tomorrow to see her first Horned Lark. 

Heck, just nature itself.  Anyone have any idea how many Aurora chasers drove over Sno Qual last night to the east side to try to catch open skies for Northern lights.  Likely more than the Turkey opener in a couple weeks.   

I think we overestimate sometimes how big our user group really is.   

[JimmyHoffa]

I don't doubt they bring money.  I just read it as an attempt by wdfw to move more and more towards those outdoor activities and further away from the big pot of gold for hunting/fishing.  Go by the thread title, wdfw banking on birdwatching. 

[boneaddict]

Theres a lot of money in wildlife.   Say they make the Yakima River Canyon corridor a no hunting wildlife preserve.   That eliminates tribal hunting as well along the river.   Think of the sheep and eventually deer plus everything else there would be and the draw of people.   I already see how many show up to the feeding stations to catch a view.      They could still figure out a way to keep the sheep units open, just closed along the corridor.   That would way boost the economics of the area.   They have already made a huge fishery out of it.   There's a lot of money coming in to fish the Yakima.     Look at attractions like the Bison Range or that little park in Downtown Denver(Arsenal).   It might have been what they should have done with Hanford.   

I'm thinking they were hoping to dip into some of these user groups a little more with the discovery pass  of course other agencies joined the club and added their BLM pass, Forest circus pass, and so on......  and then many just dont buy the damn thing.   If they could only somehow charge for Bird watching, LOL

[hughjorgan]

All this time wasted on the forum and we’re missing the Sandhill crane festival in othello this weekend. Tours at $60 a seat, have to register, buses(fuel) for shuttling people, lectures, etc.  Lots of people.

Snow geese up in Skagit county? Tons of people!

Ever been to the Skagit to see the eagles when the chums are rotting? I have once. Skagit Eagle Festival? Crap tons of people up there all spending money on food, souvenirs, fuel,
Etc.

Google “ocean shores snowy owls”. Lots of people go there specifically for the owls.


I live right next to Cherry Valley in Duvall. Very popular pheasant release site. Also for bird watching. There’s even a tower for it. It doesn’t get corked full of people bird watching, but it happens.

I totally get the point you guys are trying to make, but to say that people don’t put a lot of money into the WA economy bird watching tells me some of you are missing something. And I’m not a bird watcher so I’m sure there are other cool bird events or things people come here for. They’re all spending money.

I’ve been to the crane festival in Othello. There wasn’t what I would consider lots of people but there was a good showing. The number of people we encountered looking at the cranes didn’t have high end European optics, they were running vortex optics.

I have no doubt birders spend a decent amount of money but I question the data saying it is nearly 6 billion dollars when they are saying only one percent of Washingtonians that view wildlife actually travel to view wildlife(that’s only 40000 people per their data) and the 4.2 million are counted as watching wildlife from home. Did they buy billions of dollars in bird seed, feeders, suet, hummingbird feeder feeders, etc. I don’t see the home wildlife watchers buying high end optics or gear for that matter.

They then marginalize hunting dollars by not include hunting efforts like scouting trips.

[SuperX]

"bringing money into the economy" doesn't pay a dime into to WDFW.  It goes to hotels and gas station owners.  I would like to see a list of 'unfunded mandates" that drain the budget.  I bet they are things like legal fees to save wild salmon, orcas, beaver trapping and the like, studies of wolf restoration, opening of streams to fish migrations, tearing down dams, and repaying for predation by wolves and elk on private land. 

If this state was more focused on quality fish and game, they may crack the top 10 destinations for non-resident hunters and fishers. 

[Humptulips]

If WDFW did not exist, I doubt the wildlife viewing numbers would be much different. I fear this Commission and the Department uses these numbers to rationalize their spending of more money on non-game and at the same time emphasize viewing over consumptive use. I don't mind a bit of my license money going for something like snowy plovers but most should be going towards game management.

[JBG]

I don’t know about the rest of you but I’ve never encountered anyone out and about looking at birds or any other wildlife, unless it was other hunters. The figures they come up with are trash while trying to marginalize what comes from us as hunters. As I see it the wildlife watchers and the numbers for their contribution seems like nothing more than propaganda.

I guess you dont hunt anywhere near skagit bay.  I love raining out snow goose flocks with all the subaru's parked along the road watching the carnage through their telephoto lenses. 

[MR5x5]

 

What a bunch of victims.  Read the report.  The numbers are what they are. Wildlife watching encompasses just about anything you do outdoor where you enjoy nature.

"In 2022, wildlife watchers spent $5.8 billion in
support of their activities. $5.1 billion was spent on
equipment, including binoculars, camera equipment
and lenses, scopes or viewing devices, field guides,
bird feed, and structures that like bird houses or bird
baths that attract wildlife. Expenditures also included
camping gear, hiking equipment, and other field gear,
and kayaks, canoes, boats, scuba diving equipment,
paddleboards, and other special equipment used to
view wildlife. "

The purpose of the report is to demonstrate the economic value of all things wildlife recreation in WA.  Where is the problem with that?

The constant whining grows tiresome.

[Alan K]

When the commission uses it as evidence that the hunting community is so insignificant that we can be trimmed.

That very quote you list shows how disingenuous it was, assuming equipment expenditures on binoculars, spotting scopes, and cameras are all used for 'viewing' not hunting... Give me a break!

I'd probably shrug my shoulders in the past but as openly anti-hunting as this commission has shown themselves to be, reaching for any thread of 'evidence' to point to, it's important to point out flaws.

[UrbanTrapper]

https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/administration/budget/operating

How much of that "General Fund - Federal" is Pittman Roberts money collected from hunters and shooters buying firearms, ammunition etc.?

[hughjorgan]

When the commission uses it as evidence that the hunting community is so insignificant that we can be trimmed.

That very quote you list shows how disingenuous it was, assuming equipment expenditures on binoculars, spotting scopes, and cameras are all used for 'viewing' not hunting... Give me a break!

I'd probably shrug my shoulders in the past but as openly anti-hunting as this commission has shown themselves to be, reaching for any thread of 'evidence' to point to, it's important to point out flaws.

 

What a bunch of victims.  Read the report.  The numbers are what they are. Wildlife watching encompasses just about anything you do outdoor where you enjoy nature.

"In 2022, wildlife watchers spent $5.8 billion in
support of their activities. $5.1 billion was spent on
equipment, including binoculars, camera equipment
and lenses, scopes or viewing devices, field guides,
bird feed, and structures that like bird houses or bird
baths that attract wildlife. Expenditures also included
camping gear, hiking equipment, and other field gear,
and kayaks, canoes, boats, scuba diving equipment,
paddleboards, and other special equipment used to
view wildlife. "

The purpose of the report is to demonstrate the economic value of all things wildlife recreation in WA.  Where is the problem with that?

The constant whining grows tiresome.

Have you even in the slightest paid attention to the fight we are in with the anti hunters. Washington Wildlife FIrst and and Wildlife for All would love your attitude toward this report as they try to marginalize hunters for our contribution towards hunting and conservation.

Have you sat and listened to our commissioners? There are a good number NOT on our side and they are using these surveys as evidence that our opinions shouldn’t hold as much weight if any.

[bigtex]

https://wdfw.wa.gov/about/administration/budget/operating

How much of that "General Fund - Federal" is Pittman Roberts money collected from hunters and shooters buying firearms, ammunition etc.?

About 22 million, or 15% of the total federal dollars.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[fishngamereaper]

What a bunch of victims.  Read the report.  The numbers are what they are. Wildlife watching encompasses just about anything you do outdoor where you enjoy nature.

"In 2022, wildlife watchers spent $5.8 billion in
support of their activities. $5.1 billion was spent on
equipment, including binoculars, camera equipment
and lenses, scopes or viewing devices, field guides,
bird feed, and structures that like bird houses or bird
baths that attract wildlife. Expenditures also included
camping gear, hiking equipment, and other field gear,
and kayaks, canoes, boats, scuba diving equipment,
paddleboards, and other special equipment used to
view wildlife. "

The purpose of the report is to demonstrate the economic value of all things wildlife recreation in WA.  Where is the problem with that?

The constant whining grows tiresome.

It's not whining it's a logical response to an illogical data point.

Encompassing my purchases into a "viewing" expenditure is minimizing my impact on the economy.... especially since 90 percent of my gear is used 100 percent for killing fish and game...my offshore boat is NOT for viewing. They are able to manipulate the data in their favor since I'm not blind and do view things while fishing.

So by earmarking fishing and hunting expenditures into a viewing category they are able to justify reducing opportunity, reducing our voice, and continuing their goal of "canceling" our lifestyle..
It's been happening for years....this current commission does not like us...and they aren't shy about saying it..

[fishngamereaper]

I would love to see the survey that generated the numbers. Or how they came up with them...
And a breakdown of who's who. Who's just a "viewer" v. those who fish/hunt/view...

I think that would help.. we'd either be justified in an overreaction or have to emphatically apologize to the hardcore 5 billion dollar industry of viewers..

[JimmyHoffa]

Fishngamereaper, Olympic national park has/had sensors under highway 101 around lake crescent to count vehicles.  My understanding is that each vehicle that passed was counted as a visitor to the park.  Even log trucks and Amazon vans get counted.  Just something in a similar vein, one stat when questioned isn't as overwhelming as someone wants people to believe.

[HillHound]

What a bunch of victims.  Read the report.  The numbers are what they are. Wildlife watching encompasses just about anything you do outdoor where you enjoy nature.

"In 2022, wildlife watchers spent $5.8 billion in
support of their activities. $5.1 billion was spent on
equipment, including binoculars, camera equipment
and lenses, scopes or viewing devices, field guides,
bird feed, and structures that like bird houses or bird
baths that attract wildlife. Expenditures also included
camping gear, hiking equipment, and other field gear,
and kayaks, canoes, boats, scuba diving equipment,
paddleboards, and other special equipment used to
view wildlife. "

The purpose of the report is to demonstrate the economic value of all things wildlife recreation in WA.  Where is the problem with that?

The constant whining grows tiresome.

Your damn right we are victims. Victims of this irresponsible commission and the members on it that are anti hunters and only there to take our opportunities away.

[MR5x5]

Actually read the report with an open mind if you can.   At least read the exec summary and the conclusion.

So add bird watchers to the list of people we want to disparage at a time we need allies - "Bird Wacthers" by the way is not a term that appears anywhere in the report (but most certainly appears in this thread).  Oh not bird watchers, just wildlife watchers. Fine, then lets just lump anyone who enjoys the outdoors in with those are not as worthy as us.  Now we've isolated ourselves against the world. That's a Bold strategy Cotton.

Yeah, but they don't give us any respect:

"Many participants took part in more than
one activity; anglers and hunters were far more likely to participate in wildlife watching than those who
do not participate in these activities."

Kind of implies they need to respect huntung and fishing, because if we go a big part of the money goes with us - we are most of the the watchers, hence most of the money.

Yeah, but we don't get our share of the money - not sure what the details of the Reactiviation plan are, but anything looking to boost recruitment must surely be a bad thing.

"The results delivered in this report will
support the implementation of the Washington Hunting and Angling Recruitment, Retention, and
Reactivation (R3) Plan and the 10-Year Recreation Strategy for WDFW-Managed Lands, as well as the
agency’s 25-Year Strategic Plan."

Kind of looks like the report is trying to justifying funding in an already tough political environment.  That too is surely a bad thing.

You want to be a perpetual victim?  Fine be that way, stay that way. It's the woke thing to do. I certainly don't intend to give them that much free rent in my head.

[Humptulips]

The problem is this will be used as justification for spending as in non-consumptive users contribute so much to the economy and so expect a greater say so in spending and the direction of the Department. I would prefer their justification to come from how much they actually contribute to the budget. The AR community constantly spout about what a minority the hunting community is. This will be a bludgeon used against us.
Sportsmen don't pay for all the WDFW as the budget posted shows. That does nothing to show how much is spent on non-game verses game species. I have a feeling Sportsmen more than pull their weight but something like this can be used to marginalize our voice.

[MR5x5]

Point taken.  I appreciate the thoughtful response.  I looked back at more detailed WDFW budget info avail on line and it seems the "Wildlife and Conservation" budget line of $83M is pretty consistent and is up made up of basically license fees.  I've posted the definition that I found below.  So licensing fees acct for 11% seems legit.   But I think to your point, that narrowly defines hunter contribution seeing as our broader contribution to the tax base is effectively mixed in with the general tax base.  FWIW page 4 of the report indicates total fishing/hunting expenditures of $3.2B.  So just spit balling here... if we deduct $100m from $3.2B as License fee contributions and tax the balance at 10% then our community adds another $310M to the tax base which represents 43% of the funding budget bring us to a total of 54% of the operating budget.  Clearly significant.  Seems reasonable to me. You?  I'm hoping whomever argues on our behalf is making similar arguments.

Regarding the report, I just don't think it's intent was to address any one specific issue, I think it was prepared to justify the departments existence and secure funding. Simple annual budgetary prep material...nothing more

I get we all share WDFW PTSD, but our all to typical knee jerk reaction to lash out at everything does not help us.  Just my $0.02.

I've said to much. 

Cheers, all.

"Recreational fishing and hunting
licenses, and interest generate the
projected revenue for this portion
of the Wildlife Account.
Recreational license fee revenue
is used to provide support to
recreational angling and hunting
opportunities. Commercial
application fees support Licensing
Division work related to processing
commercial license applications."

[hughjorgan]

Point taken.  I appreciate the thoughtful response.  I looked back at more detailed WDFW budget info avail on line and it seems the "Wildlife and Conservation" budget line of $83M is pretty consistent and is up made up of basically license fees.  I've posted the definition that I found below.  So licensing fees acct for 11% seems legit.   But I think to your point, that narrowly defines hunter contribution seeing as our broader contribution to the tax base is effectively mixed in with the general tax base.  FWIW page 4 of the report indicates total fishing/hunting expenditures of $3.2B.  So just spit balling here... if we deduct $100m from $3.2B as License fee contributions and tax the balance at 10% then our community adds another $310M to the tax base which represents 43% of the funding budget bring us to a total of 54% of the operating budget.  Clearly significant.  Seems reasonable to me. You?  I'm hoping whomever argues on our behalf is making similar arguments.

Regarding the report, I just don't think it's intent was to address any one specific issue, I think it was prepared to justify the departments existence and secure funding. Simple annual budgetary prep material...nothing more

I get we all share WDFW PTSD, but our all to typical knee jerk reaction to lash out at everything does not help us.  Just my $0.02.

I've said to much. 

Cheers, all.

"Recreational fishing and hunting
licenses, and interest generate the
projected revenue for this portion
of the Wildlife Account.
Recreational license fee revenue
is used to provide support to
recreational angling and hunting
opportunities. Commercial
application fees support Licensing
Division work related to processing
commercial license applications."

Stop with the attitude that someone else is going fight this fight for you. It’s up to all of us to fight and push back on the anti hunters on the commission. Get involved and pay attention to what’s going on and voice your opinion. The anti hunters will pick and choose and manipulate data to try change the direction of their mandate. They are trying to chip away at our bear and cougar seasons now. Are you going to let them to continually take away more from us?