Your Opinion - WDFW Budget Cuts

[bearpaw]

It appears the WDFW budget is now the topic in the legislature.

At the start of the 2010 Legislative session WDFW was expected to take another reduction in the $1 million dollar (or so) range.  The mandate from the Office of the Governor was manageable.  The most recent action by the Senate in its version of the budget has created a serious situation for the department as it calls for a little more then $6 million in additional cuts.  Attached is a summary of the impact of these proposed cuts and the impacts upon the agency.

Comparison of House and Senate cuts: http://washingtonwolf.info/pdf/Fish_and_Wildlife_2010_Budget_Talking_Points.pdf

What are your feelings?

[bearpaw]

Can't beleive none of you guys have comments about their budget.

[whacker1]

I don't know enough about their budget to know where they would cut.  The one thing they do have a lot of is upper management.  I would like to see the cuts from the top down, but doubt that will happen.  The legislative agenda in Olympia, coming from the top down leadership has always been to cut services instead of adminstration of said services for the 10 years I have been active in politics.  I am sure that we will see more of the same in that regard.

[Kain]

I will read this tonight when I get home but my feeling are that most government agencies have plenty of room to make cuts.  Just look at the recent post about the new position on global warming.  The problem is that these departments always make cuts where it will hurt the public the most as a way to punish us for wanting the cuts.  They will scream and cry about how many jobs will be lost and how detrimental this will be.  Truth is they could make smaller cuts across the board by finding efficiencies OR fully fund core programs and remove any fluff and/or pet projects.

[bearpaw]

I agree with both of you, whacker and Kain. I'm afraid it will spell out in the end as a loss to wardens, hatcheries, core services, etc. as you have said.

[Shootmoore]

I agree with both of you, whacker and Kain. I'm afraid it will spell out in the end as a loss to wardens, hatcheries, core services, etc. as you have said.

I'm afraid your right bearpaw.  The last round of budget cuts was a bottom up approach.  Instead of whacking off some of the fluff on the top.  I imagine they are going to once again keep the managers and cut the worker bee's.  I have to wonder why we need a director of everything today?  It used to be a director, assistant director, 1 guy in charge of Fish and 1 for Game.  Now you have a furbearar, elk, deer, predator, wolf, salmon recovery, fish, cougar, bear, etc etc etc who are all based in Oly.  Now they are making a climate change manager?  My brother is a worker bee for the state, he will be lucky to survive this round of cuts.  Even though he works at 3 hatcheries now since the last round of cuts, because they do not have the number of worker bee's to cover each hatchery.

Shootmoore

[Wacenturion]

It's always been bottom up.  To get top down first thing on the agenda is getting a Director who not only knows where to start at the top, but also has the you know what's to do it.  Never going to happen in our life time......too much of the not rock the boat with upper management and the commission.  Sad thing is...is so easy to make that agency efficient if it was necessary.

[bearpaw]

Since the legislature is looking over these cuts, would it do any good to ask the legislators to force the cuts at the top?

[Kain]

Since the legislature is looking over these cuts, would it do any good to ask the legislators to force the cuts at the top?

Thats a good idea.  It cant hurt thats for sure. 

The "core" functions of the department need to be defined and they should be told that anything that does not fall in one of those should be reviewed and then justified before funding.  They need to look into partnering and sharing data with neighboring states and splitting the costs or just using the data from others states when they can.  Subbing out some functions to private companies should also be looked at.

[Curly]

I wonder what the wolf budget is?     They should get rid of anything to do with helping wolves.

[Shootmoore]

I wonder what the wolf budget is?     They should get rid of anything to do with helping wolves.

I believe they were "guessing" around 700-900 thousand.

Shootmoore

[whacker1]

I have been told that the legislature doesn't have the ability to take on specific management structure within a department.  They can set budget and regulation for said department, but not hire and fire.  I am told that this is to be management directive from the governor's office, which we know won't happen.

I don't know if this information is accurate or not, but I know that there isn't anyone in these roles in any of state government that is going to make many cuts to upper and middle management in order to retain the quality of service.  I am pretty sure tha the governor still has her 30 + aids and hasn't eliminated any of those positions.  

[roadhuntking]

They're hiring a Deputy Asst. Director.

http://www.wdfw.wa.gov/employment/jobs/1316_WMS_030910.pdf

[whacker1]

Probably the best recourse is to ask the question from us to them, person by person, as we have with letters to the legislature.  And the question is:  How can you justify hiring the following positions: deputy assistant director, climate change mgr, etc. when you know that you are facing budget cuts from the legislature in the next 30 -60 days?  Maybe we as the voters need to hold each department at the state level accountable.    My bet is that the climate change mgr is a directive that comes directly from gregoire's office.

We could potentially ask these questions of the director and the commission as to why there haven't been any middle management or upper management reductions via the last few budget cuts?   I don't know what else to try.  the legislature sure as hell isn't going to do it.

[bigtex]

I agree with both of you, whacker and Kain. I'm afraid it will spell out in the end as a loss to wardens, hatcheries, core services, etc. as you have said.

Actually as the current budget proposal is written there is no cut to WDFW enforcement.

Here is the current proposed budget in a easier to understand format:

http://fiscal.wa.gov/FRViewer.aspx?Rpt=Operating+Budget+Agency+Detail

Just select "Fish and Wildlife" under the agency area