Community > Advocacy, Agencies, Access
Senate Bill 6813 to Abolish the WDFW
sako223:
You continue to state in one fashion or another that the WDFW is profitable. Your interpretations and math are not even palatable. In fact far from reality.
--- Quote ---I feel if you understood how their budget is formed and what total revenue's they bring in, given the personnel cutbacks they have had, that you would see they are actually very profitable for a public Agency, yet legislators keep them unprofitable.
--- End quote ---
Please show us where they are "Very Profitable" I'm sure a lot of people would love to see it including the state legislators who could spend that 30% of the WDFW budget somewhere else. I would like to know when the last time the WDFW was "Truly Profitable" if ever. From 2007-9 they received $110 million from the state general fund.
I am all for cutting fat, but as it stands that won't happen easily.
bigtex:
--- Quote from: Dmanmastertracker on February 09, 2010, 09:04:24 AM ---
--- Quote from: bobcat on February 06, 2010, 11:42:31 PM ---
--- Quote from: Dmanmastertracker on February 06, 2010, 11:36:10 AM --- The DNR is a good organization, but in my dealing's with them, they are more on the conservation side in this State, the majority of Western Wa. DNR land's are not open to hunting, that tell's me a lot.
--- End quote ---
Do you mean to say "the majority of DNR lands ARE OPEN to hunting? Because they are. Not sure where you're getting your information. I've hunted lots of DNR land in western Washington. I don't believe I've ever seen any that wasn't open for hunting. I think there could possibly be some in King County that may not be open for hunting, but that would be the exception to the rule. But hey, go ahead and keep thinking you can't hunt DNR land, that's less competition for me, and please keep spreading the word that DNR lands are off limits. ;)
--- End quote ---
You may be right about that, I was thinking all watersheds were administered by the DNR, but that may not be the case according to the latest map. If you total the acreage of conservation area's, watersheds and DNR lands with no legal public access, it's about a 50/50 split. The legal access issue I guess is also a little different, to me it's "closed", if a legal access is not granted, or in existence, then it's not open to hunting. There are some very large blocks that fall under this category.
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/eng_rms_mpl_7_med.pdf
--- End quote ---
Watersheds are administered by the individual county/city/water district not the DNR. DNR might simply own land that is in a watershed however it does not own the watershed. For example last year DNR bought up a lot of land in the Cedar River watershed, so they can continue to use it as a working forest and use the timber however the watershed itself is administered by the city of Seattle. There is a lot of land that DNR owns and is legally open but is surrounded by private property so access to it is basically impossible. The same goes with BLM (US Bureau of Land Management) land up in NE WA, BLM is currently working with other agencies for a land swap/purchase so that BLM can actually own some land in NE WA that is accessible.
bigtex:
--- Quote from: sako223 on February 07, 2010, 12:26:17 AM ---
Both DNR & BLM offer access for recreation and hunting. Both with more land than the WDFW has.
--- End quote ---
The statement about BLM is actually incorrect. In Washington State BLM owns only around 445,000 acres compared to over a million by the WDFW. Most of the BLM land in WA is in Lincoln County. BLM land is only in the western US; however WA St has the least amount of BLM lands out of the entire west. There is actually no BLM land in Western Washington with the exception of a couple of the small uninhabited San Juan Islands.
Dmanmastertracker:
--- Quote from: bigtex on February 09, 2010, 11:47:26 AM ---
--- Quote from: Dmanmastertracker on February 09, 2010, 09:04:24 AM ---
--- Quote from: bobcat on February 06, 2010, 11:42:31 PM ---
--- Quote from: Dmanmastertracker on February 06, 2010, 11:36:10 AM --- The DNR is a good organization, but in my dealing's with them, they are more on the conservation side in this State, the majority of Western Wa. DNR land's are not open to hunting, that tell's me a lot.
--- End quote ---
Do you mean to say "the majority of DNR lands ARE OPEN to hunting? Because they are. Not sure where you're getting your information. I've hunted lots of DNR land in western Washington. I don't believe I've ever seen any that wasn't open for hunting. I think there could possibly be some in King County that may not be open for hunting, but that would be the exception to the rule. But hey, go ahead and keep thinking you can't hunt DNR land, that's less competition for me, and please keep spreading the word that DNR lands are off limits. ;)
--- End quote ---
You may be right about that, I was thinking all watersheds were administered by the DNR, but that may not be the case according to the latest map. If you total the acreage of conservation area's, watersheds and DNR lands with no legal public access, it's about a 50/50 split. The legal access issue I guess is also a little different, to me it's "closed", if a legal access is not granted, or in existence, then it's not open to hunting. There are some very large blocks that fall under this category.
http://www.dnr.wa.gov/Publications/eng_rms_mpl_7_med.pdf
--- End quote ---
Watersheds are administered by the individual county/city/water district not the DNR. DNR might simply own land that is in a watershed however it does not own the watershed. For example last year DNR bought up a lot of land in the Cedar River watershed, so they can continue to use it as a working forest and use the timber however the watershed itself is administered by the city of Seattle. There is a lot of land that DNR owns and is legally open but is surrounded by private property so access to it is basically impossible. The same goes with BLM (US Bureau of Land Management) land up in NE WA, BLM is currently working with other agencies for a land swap/purchase so that BLM can actually own some land in NE WA that is accessible.
--- End quote ---
Good info. thanks.
Dmanmastertracker:
I guess my opinion is formed from going to over 10 State Wildlife meeting's on budgeting, working in State work groups on wildlife budgeting and in my own interaction with the DNR. Some of you remember when a DNR official was telling hunters the Tiger Mountain State Forest was closed to hunting, most feel due to their own opinion on hunting. The DNR does some great thing's for habitat, but I'm not sure they would be the best ally of the hunter.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version