Post by: Hangfire on November 01, 2010, 11:03:37 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/enforcement/surveys/customer_survey.html (http://wdfw.wa.gov/enforcement/surveys/customer_survey.html)
Takes a short time to fill out and send.
Post by: chester on November 01, 2010, 11:46:06 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on November 02, 2010, 06:11:28 AM
Post by: Huntboy on November 02, 2010, 06:17:19 AM
Done:yeah:
Post by: huntandjeep on November 02, 2010, 01:57:15 PM
Post by: dscubame on November 02, 2010, 02:04:41 PM
Post by: woodywsu on November 02, 2010, 02:08:11 PM
Post by: grundy53 on November 02, 2010, 02:59:17 PM
Post by: bigtex on November 02, 2010, 04:51:00 PM
I drove through Kittitas last Sunday and a gamie was running a speed trap in city limits. Glad he couldn't find anything better to do with his time.
WDFW Officers do not do radar enforcement. Just because he had somebody pulled over doesn't mean he was doing radar work. In fact they do not have radar guns. Also, Kittitas County Sheriffs have several trucks that look very similar to WDFW.
Post by: Alan K on November 02, 2010, 05:31:50 PM
Post by: BLKBEARKLR on November 02, 2010, 05:39:25 PM
I drove through Kittitas last Sunday and a gamie was running a speed trap in city limits. Glad he couldn't find anything better to do with his time.
A gamie??? I have talked to many officers and have never seen a radar gun.
That was a good survey, hope everyone is filling it out with the intentions of getting more officers out there and allowing more time so they can do their job.
Joe
Post by: superdown on November 02, 2010, 05:39:29 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 02, 2010, 05:47:16 PM
E-mail them more comments if needed, I did.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on November 02, 2010, 05:54:08 PM
I drove through Kittitas last Sunday and a gamie was running a speed trap in city limits. Glad he couldn't find anything better to do with his time.
WDFW Officers do not do radar enforcement. Just because he had somebody pulled over doesn't mean he was doing radar work. In fact they do not have radar guns.
Completely wrong. They have the authority to pull over drivers just like regular cops. The game warden here showed me a note from his boss saying he HAS to pull over and ticket so many people per month for a quota.no *censored* !
Post by: gasman on November 02, 2010, 05:59:05 PM
Post by: Tman on November 02, 2010, 06:03:36 PM
Post by: butcher98951 on November 02, 2010, 06:13:08 PM
Post by: bigtex on November 02, 2010, 06:16:14 PM
I drove through Kittitas last Sunday and a gamie was running a speed trap in city limits. Glad he couldn't find anything better to do with his time.
WDFW Officers do not do radar enforcement. Just because he had somebody pulled over doesn't mean he was doing radar work. In fact they do not have radar guns.
Completely wrong. They have the authority to pull over drivers just like regular cops. The game warden here showed me a note from his boss saying he HAS to pull over and ticket so many people per month for a quota.no *censored* !
I never said they dont have the authority to pull over drivers!
I said they don't have radars! Read the dam statement
Post by: bigtex on November 02, 2010, 06:22:08 PM
Even if the guy wasn't "radaring" people gamies still enforce to many laws that both the city and state patrol enforcement should be enforcing. To much of their time is wasted on non-game related enforcement. They need to be in the woods and along the rivers catching people violating game laws not taking part in house raids on meth houses which one gamie in the past told me he did. They are way under staffed as it is but to pull them away from enforcing game laws is ubsurd.... they need to revamp the enforcement program and i'm hoping this survey is part of that and they take into consideration the results of it.
E-mail them more comments if needed, I did.
It use to be that WDFW could only enforce fish and wildlife laws. However as more and more general crimes started to happen in the woods, on the rivers, and on WDFW lands, WDFW asked for and was granted general authority (basically means they can enforce all laws). It use to be if someone was doing something illegal that wasn't WDFW related (such as underage drinking, doing dope, whatever) a WDFW Officer had to all the city, county or WSP in to deal with it. However with general authority WDFW Officer are doing it themselves. The job of a "game warden" across the country is really changing, it use to be just fish and wildlife enforcement but more states are starting to operate their fish and wildlife enforcement like a regular law enforcement agency, this is probably most seen with Florida.
Post by: Hangfire on November 02, 2010, 06:35:37 PM
There job and what they run into has changed immensely. When I first started hunting agents never carried side arms. They all run into felony criminals now. A agent that was in the Washougal area a few years ago, ran into 7 separate felons with warrents in one day. (probably a record). The great outdoors offer hidding places for some of societies worst. I feel there emphasis should be fish and wildlife work. In fact I think any non wildlife pinches should be subject to review by the officers supervisor. I realize they will and should take what they find but, wildlife problems is what society wants them to work
Post by: bigtex on November 02, 2010, 06:42:31 PM
The local agent told me a few agents DO have radar guns. These were bought by there local county to help with special occasions, like the large concerts in Central Washington.
There job and what they run into has changed immensely. When I first started hunting agents never carried side arms. They all run into felony criminals now. A agent that was in the Washougal area a few years ago, ran into 7 separate felons with warrents in one day. (probably a record). The great outdoors offer hidding places for some of societies worst. I feel there emphasis should be fish and wildlife work. In fact I think any non wildlife pinches should be subject to review by the officers supervisor. I realize they will and should take what they find but, wildlife problems is what society wants them to work
A few do but only for the special events in which they are there on overtime paid for the event. For example the Gorge pays for WDFW to be there. So if it is just a general patrol day then they won't be doing radar. But WDFW does not purchase radars, and WDFW actually limits how much traffic enforcement an officer does.
Post by: rb2506 on November 02, 2010, 06:51:34 PM
Post by: upwind on November 02, 2010, 07:09:21 PM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on November 02, 2010, 09:39:21 PM
Post by: woodywsu on November 03, 2010, 08:04:55 AM
I drove through Kittitas last Sunday and a gamie was running a speed trap in city limits. Glad he couldn't find anything better to do with his time.
WDFW Officers do not do radar enforcement. Just because he had somebody pulled over doesn't mean he was doing radar work. In fact they do not have radar guns.
Completely wrong. They have the authority to pull over drivers just like regular cops. The game warden here showed me a note from his boss saying he HAS to pull over and ticket so many people per month for a quota.no *censored* !
I never said they dont have the authority to pull over drivers!
I said they don't have radars! Read the dam statement
He didn't have somebody pulled over. He was standing outside his vehicle pointing a RADAR gun toward traffic. They perform traffic stops all the time and it is part of their job responsibility. Hopefully this survey is a step in the right direction to get our enforcement agents back to protecting fish, wildlife, and resources. The drug task force needs to be handled by other agencies. I'm tired of hearing how many pot plants our wardens are pulling and investigating for, when certain fisheries are not be enforced and wildlife are being poached.
Post by: bobcat on November 03, 2010, 08:41:50 AM
Post by: woodywsu on November 03, 2010, 08:45:40 AM
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 09:34:00 AM
Sorry but I find it hard to believe that fish and wildlife officers are doing speed limit enforcement. If this is true we need to bombard the WDFW and possibly the governor's office with letters.
This guys (WSU) is an idiot. WDFW limits how much traffic enforcement they can do, and they only want them doing it for dangerous situations (DUIs, reckless drivers and so on). If a WDFW Officer starts pulling over speeders then they will no longer be a WDFW Officer. Most WDFW Officers don't even do DUIs
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 09:36:07 AM
I drove through Kittitas last Sunday and a gamie was running a speed trap in city limits. Glad he couldn't find anything better to do with his time.
WDFW Officers do not do radar enforcement. Just because he had somebody pulled over doesn't mean he was doing radar work. In fact they do not have radar guns.
Completely wrong. They have the authority to pull over drivers just like regular cops. The game warden here showed me a note from his boss saying he HAS to pull over and ticket so many people per month for a quota.no *censored* !
I never said they dont have the authority to pull over drivers!
I said they don't have radars! Read the dam statement
He didn't have somebody pulled over. He was standing outside his vehicle pointing a RADAR gun toward traffic. They perform traffic stops all the time and it is part of their job responsibility. Hopefully this survey is a step in the right direction to get our enforcement agents back to protecting fish, wildlife, and resources. The drug task force needs to be handled by other agencies. I'm tired of hearing how many pot plants our wardens are pulling and investigating for, when certain fisheries are not be enforced and wildlife are being poached.
Traffic stops are not part of their responsibility, can they do it? Yes, but they are limited by policy as to how mcuh they do it because fish and wildlife is their agency mission, not traffic. Read any WDFW report, it says the same thing!
Are you sure it wasn't a Kittitas County Deputy doing the speed enforcement? WDFW and Kittitas SO trucks looks very similar
Post by: JLS on November 03, 2010, 09:59:22 AM
How do you know they still don't?
If it's acceptable to refer to them as "gamies", is it acceptable for the enforcement officers to refer to us sportsmen as "bubbas", or "hunting slobs", or whatever funny moniker they come up with?
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 10:08:23 AM
. I remember his dad would do things like all night stakeouts, deer decoys--had a robot deer, following fishermen with night vision...
How do you know they still don't?
If it's acceptable to refer to them as "gamies", is it acceptable for the enforcement officers to refer to us sportsmen as "bubbas", or "hunting slobs", or whatever funny moniker they come up with?
:yeah:
WDFW Officers are "Officers" not "gamies" or "agents" and most get ticked if you call them a gamie or agent. Game warden is ok, but officer is the best.
I think a lot of people are confused as to what a WDFW Officer does. People assume that every officer who checks their fishing license is a WDFW Officer, well every law enforcement officer in the state can enforce WDFW laws and many agencies are starting to realize that you can catch a lot of people with warrants by doing simply license checks. I talked to a buddy who was fishing the Green River in Auburn this summer, an Auburn PD cop came up checked his license and a guy fishing the same beach, the officer left and a couple minutes later three more officers arrived and arrested the guy on outstanding warrants.
WDFW still do all of the "game warden" duties such as robo deers and night vision goggles. Hell they are even using fake grouse now to see people shooting from their cars.
Post by: grundy53 on November 03, 2010, 11:02:23 AM
. I remember his dad would do things like all night stakeouts, deer decoys--had a robot deer, following fishermen with night vision...
How do you know they still don't?
If it's acceptable to refer to them as "gamies", is it acceptable for the enforcement officers to refer to us sportsmen as "bubbas", or "hunting slobs", or whatever funny moniker they come up with?
:yeah:
WDFW Officers are "Officers" not "gamies" or "agents" and most get ticked if you call them a gamie or agent. Game warden is ok, but officer is the best.
I think a lot of people are confused as to what a WDFW Officer does. People assume that every officer who checks their fishing license is a WDFW Officer, well every law enforcement officer in the state can enforce WDFW laws and many agencies are starting to realize that you can catch a lot of people with warrants by doing simply license checks. I talked to a buddy who was fishing the Green River in Auburn this summer, an Auburn PD cop came up checked his license and a guy fishing the same beach, the officer left and a couple minutes later three more officers arrived and arrested the guy on outstanding warrants.
WDFW still do all of the "game warden" duties such as robo deers and night vision goggles. Hell they are even using fake grouse now to see people shooting from their cars.
Who really gives a $hit what someone calls them? Not everyone is a cop groupy like you.
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 11:05:18 AM
. I remember his dad would do things like all night stakeouts, deer decoys--had a robot deer, following fishermen with night vision...
How do you know they still don't?
If it's acceptable to refer to them as "gamies", is it acceptable for the enforcement officers to refer to us sportsmen as "bubbas", or "hunting slobs", or whatever funny moniker they come up with?
:yeah:
WDFW Officers are "Officers" not "gamies" or "agents" and most get ticked if you call them a gamie or agent. Game warden is ok, but officer is the best.
I think a lot of people are confused as to what a WDFW Officer does. People assume that every officer who checks their fishing license is a WDFW Officer, well every law enforcement officer in the state can enforce WDFW laws and many agencies are starting to realize that you can catch a lot of people with warrants by doing simply license checks. I talked to a buddy who was fishing the Green River in Auburn this summer, an Auburn PD cop came up checked his license and a guy fishing the same beach, the officer left and a couple minutes later three more officers arrived and arrested the guy on outstanding warrants.
WDFW still do all of the "game warden" duties such as robo deers and night vision goggles. Hell they are even using fake grouse now to see people shooting from their cars.
Who really gives a $hit what someone calls them? Not everyone is a cop groupy like you.
Well respect means everything, if your in violation of the law simply being courteous and calling them an officer could mean they let you go. I know this for a fact. And I bring years of experience of being called an "agent" when i wasn't one.
Post by: Cougeyes on November 03, 2010, 11:12:26 AM
Post by: grundy53 on November 03, 2010, 11:17:57 AM
. I remember his dad would do things like all night stakeouts, deer decoys--had a robot deer, following fishermen with night vision...
How do you know they still don't?
If it's acceptable to refer to them as "gamies", is it acceptable for the enforcement officers to refer to us sportsmen as "bubbas", or "hunting slobs", or whatever funny moniker they come up with?
:yeah:
WDFW Officers are "Officers" not "gamies" or "agents" and most get ticked if you call them a gamie or agent. Game warden is ok, but officer is the best.
I think a lot of people are confused as to what a WDFW Officer does. People assume that every officer who checks their fishing license is a WDFW Officer, well every law enforcement officer in the state can enforce WDFW laws and many agencies are starting to realize that you can catch a lot of people with warrants by doing simply license checks. I talked to a buddy who was fishing the Green River in Auburn this summer, an Auburn PD cop came up checked his license and a guy fishing the same beach, the officer left and a couple minutes later three more officers arrived and arrested the guy on outstanding warrants.
WDFW still do all of the "game warden" duties such as robo deers and night vision goggles. Hell they are even using fake grouse now to see people shooting from their cars.
Who really gives a $hit what someone calls them? Not everyone is a cop groupy like you.
Well respect means everything, if your in violation of the law simply being courteous and calling them an officer could mean they let you go. I know this for a fact. And I bring years of experience of being called an "agent" when i wasn't one.
I'm talking about on this forum. When I speak to a game warden or any other officer I'm very respectful and always call them "officer".
Post by: deadwoodbuck on November 03, 2010, 11:19:45 AM
Post by: JLS on November 03, 2010, 11:20:59 AM
Post by: runamuk on November 03, 2010, 11:25:12 AM
Post by: grundy53 on November 03, 2010, 11:31:51 AM
Except when you're posting on the internet? Respect is also how you treat folks when they are not around.
And there you have it. Im respectful because I don't want them to make up some b.s.. respect is a 2 way street. I would actually respect them if they treated me with respect. I have rarely been treated with respect by Leo's even though I always am respectful to them. They just act like I'm there to serve them. It's their job to serve the public not the other way around. There are a few good ones and I truly respect those gentlemen/women
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 11:35:11 AM
Well it appears you have a wealth of knowledge you could provide the rest of us on this topic. You were some sort of enforcement "officer" correct? Do you agree or disagree that game warden duties have shifted quite drastically over the years? Game wardens used to be in the woods all the time, patrolling on foot, horseback, riding on quads etc.. but now in my opinion and the opinion of many other hunters i know they do not spend near the amount of time patrolling areas they should be because their time is being taken up on issues like responding to domestic violence, a skunk or racoon is bothering someone's dog etc.... meth labs.....
Obviously the role of a WDFW Officer has changed over the years. Back under the old game and wildlife departments an officer was a mixture of a biologist and an enforcement officer. During hunting seasons they were doing the typical enforcement missions. During the offseason they were still in the woods doing biological surveys and when they were doing this they could run into poachers. Once the fisheries and wildlife departments merged they became a solely enforcement position. And this trend from a biologist/enforcement position to an exclusively enforcement position is being seen across the country.
There was a staffing survey done in 2008 and part of it included officer’s feedbacks and many of them included what people on here think. They want to do more high country patrols, be in the woods more, more anti-poaching patrols and less nuisance wildlife. They think that they should just stick to bear, cougar, and moose problems and let a non-commissioned person deal with raccoons, deer, and elk problems. But the problem is that there is no money to hire non-commissioned personnel to deal with nuisance wildlife, so they are stuck with it.
A lot of what an officer is being driven by $ since WDFW is always getting killed in the budget. WDFW enforcement is getting a $200k grant per year to do boating enforcement, it use to be that a WDFW Officer would just check for lifejackets, now it’s everything. They get a grant to patrol sno-parks. They get a grant to help with pulling marijuana plants.
With responding to domestics and other crimes, in some of the more rural counties a WDFW Officer may be the only officer on-duty, in some counties there are no 24/7 coverage by the sheriff or WSP, so the WDFW Officer is forced to respond. Because how would it look if the only officer on duty didn’t respond to a domestic and someone ended up dying?
I think a lot of people on here think that WDFW Officers are choosing to work non-WDFW stuff, but in reality they are somewhat being forced to do so. The state legislature every year is coming up with new laws and is constantly assigning WDFW to enforce them and not providing them with extra manpower to do so. WDFW now has to regulate the pet store market, aquatic invasive species, meat lockers, cold storage facilities and so on. So when extra funding opportunities such as boating enforcement, sno-parks and marijuana comes up they have to jump on it just to secure extra $.
Officers want to do the “traditional” duties, but staffing is a big problem and the administration is forcing the coverage issue on their officers. They want officers to be able to respond to violation complaints because they are constantly receiving complaints of “I reported a violation but nobody responded or called me back, WDFW is useless”. If the only two officers in the county are on a horse patrol in a wilderness area, how are they going to respond to a poaching call 90 miles away on the other side of the county?
I don’t think the blame should be on the officers, or even WDFW, but rather the legislature, they are requiring officers to do more and more but with less people and less $.
Post by: woodywsu on November 03, 2010, 11:41:36 AM
Bigtex, how do you feel about our WDFW officers various job responsibilities? Do you think they should be less involved with various things such as traffic patrol and drug busts? I feel that they are completely understaffed for their responsibilites.
Post by: runamuk on November 03, 2010, 11:43:58 AM
Post by: woodywsu on November 03, 2010, 11:47:39 AM
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 11:48:04 AM
We should change this topic to "just ask bigtex, he's right, you're wrong".
Bigtex, how do you feel about our WDFW officers various job responsibilities? Do you think they should be less involved with various things such as traffic patrol and drug busts? I feel that they are completely understaffed for their responsibilites.
Well rite now they are limited by agency policy as to how much traffic they work, the agency only wants them dealing with dangerous drivers. And I think most people wouldnt have a problem with a WDFW Officer stopping a DUI driver.
As far as drug busts, it depends. I think if they “run into” somebody using drugs then they should deal with it. But they shouldn’t be searching for it. I think the same goes for marijuana grows, if they get a complaint or stumble upon it, then they should deal with it. Unfortunately our public lands (WDFW, USFS, BLM, and DNR) in this state are being overwhelmed by illegal activities, especially drugs and drinking problems (underage parties, etc) and a lot of times these activities have a direct connection with reckless shooting, off road violations, litter, etc. So to simply say that WDFW should just do hunting and fishing is problematic because then they couldn’t deal with the problems on their own land.
They are definitely understaffed for their responsibility, and the facts/studies back that up.
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 11:49:32 AM
Aww, I see. Legislature is requiring them to sit in downtown Kittitas on Sunday of opening day elk season. :chuckle: :bash:
Once again, I am pretty sure the officer you saw in Kittitas was a Kittitas County Deputy, they drive nearly the same pickups as WDFW. Most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 11:52:00 AM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/pub.php?id=00522 (http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/pub.php?id=00522)
Post by: woodywsu on November 03, 2010, 11:54:10 AM
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 11:56:05 AM
Were you there? No. It was a 'gamie'. His truck was covered in mud and he had a 4-wheeler in the back. I know what the wardens drive as I work with several of them.
I'm just saying, Kittitas County has several deputies that do "forest patrol" and drive similar vehicles, inlcuding ATV's
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 12:01:25 PM
• 43.8% of patrol hours were spent on fishery patrols (anything from a lake/stream to the ocean)
• 27.9% on wildlife patrols
• 9.2% on shellfish patrols
• 5.5% on WDFW lands patrol
• 2% on habitat patrol
• 10.3% on public safety issues which includes ATV enforcement, snowmobile enforcement, boating enforcement, WDFW access areas enforcement, assisting other law enforcement agencies, participating in hunter ed classes, hunting accident investigation, traffic laws, and other criminal laws
Post by: Cougeyes on November 03, 2010, 12:01:59 PM
Game officers need more training and need to quit being involved in searching for pot plantations, taking part in drug busts etc.... I do agree though that if they are the closest officer to any crime such as domestic disturbance calls, shootings, anything else then they should always respond. But as far as writing traffic violations on rural county roads or in city limits....leave that to city and state patrolmen. There are many criminals in the woods that never get caught and our fish and wildlife resources are more important than writing traffic citations.
Post by: grundy53 on November 03, 2010, 12:03:59 PM
Post by: woodywsu on November 03, 2010, 12:08:40 PM
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 12:19:27 PM
more often the degrees of game wardens are mostly criminal justice and not fisheries or wildlife. State patrolmen and other agency officers are retiring and jumping ship into game warden positions with very little to no wildlife experience.
Under the old fisheries and wildlife department days officers needed to have some type of natural resource degree. The departments merged and the number of applicants started to decrease, so they allowed criminal justice degrees. Now they can’t get enough applicants so any type of degree will qualify you to be a WDFW Officer, they just prefer natural resources degrees or criminal justice. There just really aren’t that many people who pursue natural resource degrees and those who do want to be biologists, not officers.
It use to be that everyone wanted to be a game warden, and 2k people would apply for 2 jobs, now WDFW can have 10 open positions and maybe 100 people would apply. This is sad because WDFW is considered to be the best natural resource law enforcement agency in the country. WDFW has the strictest requirements of any law enforcement agency in the state.
Post by: woodywsu on November 03, 2010, 12:22:36 PM
This is sad because WDFW is considered to be the best natural resource agency in the country.
No, that is sad that WDFW is considered to be the best natural resource agency in the county.
For christ sakes, WDFW's data is so bad, they have to set our waterfowl season on other state's data (quote from Mikal Moore, WDFW waterfowl biologist).
Post by: WDFW-SUX on November 03, 2010, 12:24:08 PM
Quote
WDFW is considered to be the best natural resource agency in the country
:lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4:
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 12:25:40 PM
WDFW is considered to be the best natural resource law enforcement agency in the country.
Post by: WDFW-SUX on November 03, 2010, 12:26:46 PM
Post by: woodywsu on November 03, 2010, 12:27:22 PM
I would like to know who?
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 12:27:46 PM
Not true, and its not even close.
According to whom? Pick up any law enforcement publication and they will say the same thing. Best pay, scheduling, equipment, and benefits in the country. WDFW has gotten a hand full of game wardens from several other states coming to WDFW in the past two years
Post by: WDFW-SUX on November 03, 2010, 12:31:03 PM
Im glad we can pay 100 bucks for hunting pheasants so they can have nice trucks to drive... :bash:
Post by: woodywsu on November 03, 2010, 12:31:23 PM
Post by: runamuk on November 03, 2010, 12:33:16 PM
Not true, and its not even close.
According to whom? Pick up any law enforcement publication and they will say the same thing. Best pay, scheduling, equipment, and benefits in the country. WDFW has gotten a hand full of game wardens from several other states coming to WDFW in the past two years
well duh state agencies are paid way beyond whats realistic here in liberal tax happy, someone else is paying my wages, fat government... WA... :bash: :bash:
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 12:36:00 PM
as a program I'm damn sure they are not considered the best agency in the county.
I'm talking simply enforcement, not the agency as a whole. Ask any game warden from any state, they all say the same thing. WA is the best, which is why they are getting many out of state transfers, when just 5 years ago they didnt have any. I know in the past 2 years they have gotten game warden transfers from Cali, Montana, Idaho, New York, and Virgiina.
Post by: Cougeyes on November 03, 2010, 12:36:09 PM
"Officers complain of the need for and inability to conduct night time patrols since poachers frequently work at night. Our
review of schedules confirms that night patrols are not common".
This is b.s. the officers want to conduct more patrols during peak time when a lot poaching happens (at night) but aren't necessarily allowed to. They want to protect the resource but can't?? This is B.S.
"Foot and other off-road patrolsare increasingly uncommon. Backcountry and off-the road patrol are becoming fewer"
“Seasonal work load is high. There are times when I have more information about illegal activity than I can work. The other officers in my detachment feel the same. A fair amount of illegal hunting activity is being under addressed. We have time to do surveillance one or two times and then we are on to the next
series of complaints.”
Why can't we train state patrolmen to aid game officers when they are overloaded with work? This should work both ways, game wardens help other agencies why can't they return the favor since any enforcement can write a citation for a wildlife infraction or at least hold the violater until a game warden can get there.
“Remote areas are becoming dangerous and suffering damage because of a lackof enforcement patrols.” (Q11)Agreed
At least they're proposing more game wardens in each county.
Post by: grundy53 on November 03, 2010, 12:36:20 PM
:yeah:QuoteWDFW is considered to be the best natural resource agency in the country
:lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4:
Bigtex really is head of their fan club isn't he... lol
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 12:38:27 PM
:yeah:QuoteWDFW is considered to be the best natural resource agency in the country
:lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4: :lol4:
Bigtex really is head of their fan club isn't he... lol
Simply providing facts
Post by: Bofire on November 03, 2010, 12:42:57 PM
Carl
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 12:46:47 PM
Why can't we train state patrolmen to aid game officers when they are overloaded with work? This should work both ways, game wardens help other agencies why can't they return the favor since any enforcement can write a citation for a wildlife infraction or at least hold the violater until a game warden can get there.
Any law enforcement officer in the state can enforce hunting and fishing laws, their agencies just don’t want them to. Unfortunately most people (non-outdoorsmen) don’t really think wildlife enforcement is a high priority and would rather have WSP doing speed and DUI enforcement rather then wildlife enforcement. Last year WSP got an additional 20 positions for a DUI team in King/Pierce/Snohomish Counties, but WDFW enforcement budget got reduced. Driving laws are more important to the legislature then WDFW laws. You see the same thing in Oregon, when budget cuts come the OSP fish and wildlife division gets cut more then road troopers. Some of the smaller counties let their deputies do it but you wont see the bigger counties do it. And in these economic times when most agencies are reducing their law enforcement positions you will not see chiefs/sheriffs wanting their officers to assisting wildlife patrols when they can be dealing with more “important crimes”.
Unfortunately the ways to actually write hunting and fishing citations are different then other tickets, and if you write the ticket wrong then the case is gone. There is a reason why it takes a month of training to teach WDFW officers how to write hunting/fishing tickets and reports. And this isn’t by choice but rather how the courts require officers to write them. One WSP trooper told me that WSP enforcement is like elementary math, but WDFW Enforcement is like calculus.
Post by: Curly on November 03, 2010, 01:36:01 PM
:) A female Game agent in Fruitland area was puling people over and citing them for no seatbelt!!
Carl
Speaking of seatbelt laws.....am I required to wear a seatbelt when out on gravel roads (DNR or Weyerhauser land)? It makes it a lot slower to have to unbuckle my seat-belt before I jump out of the truck to shoot a deer. I don't want to get a ticket from a Warden for not having a seat-belt on, but sometimes when out scouting in Capital Forest or wherever I may take the seat-belt off for a while on the back roads.
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 01:39:42 PM
I've heard that their jobs are tougher in this time of cutbacks because prosecutors are pushing wildlife laws to lower and lower priorities----basically encouraging more wildlife crime. I was also told before that game wardens were having to spend more and more time with their vehicles or in close proximity to them because criminals would view them as an easy score for guns/scanners/gear.
Several county prosecutors are saying that they will no longer prosecute fish and wildlife laws because of the budget, the Island County prosecutor even announced this on a TV news interview. So what will happen is a WDFW Officer will give you a ticket and if you plea not guilty then the case will be dropped. Wonderful isn’t it? This happened several years ago in Spokane County (when budgets were fine, the prosecutor just didn’t want to deal with WDFW crimes) and it took the governor calling the county council before something was changed.
There has been a recent “attack” on WDFW enforcement vehicles the past 3 or 4 years. Not uncommon to have an officer come back to their truck having a window smashed or tire slashed. Some have had gear stolen out of their trucks.
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 01:42:12 PM
:) A female Game agent in Fruitland area was puling people over and citing them for no seatbelt!!
Carl
Speaking of seatbelt laws.....am I required to wear a seatbelt when out on gravel roads (DNR or Weyerhauser land)? It makes it a lot slower to have to unbuckle my seat-belt before I jump out of the truck to shoot a deer. I don't want to get a ticket from a Warden for not having a seat-belt on, but sometimes when out scouting in Capital Forest or wherever I may take the seat-belt off for a while on the back roads.
DNR definitely yes because it is considered a public road just like the highway. Same goes for USFS, DFW & BLM roads.
Most timber companies have regulations saying that you must follow all traffic laws on their property and some even have speed limits. I would be shocked if Weyerhaeuser didn’t have this regulation.
Post by: Sumpnneedskillin on November 03, 2010, 01:43:27 PM
:) A female Game agent in Fruitland area was puling people over and citing them for no seatbelt!!
Carl
Speaking of seatbelt laws.....am I required to wear a seatbelt when out on gravel roads (DNR or Weyerhauser land)? It makes it a lot slower to have to unbuckle my seat-belt before I jump out of the truck to shoot a deer. I don't want to get a ticket from a Warden for not having a seat-belt on, but sometimes when out scouting in Capital Forest or wherever I may take the seat-belt off for a while on the back roads.
RCW 46.61.688
Safety belts, use required — Penalties — Exemptions.
(3) Every person sixteen years of age or older operating or riding in a motor vehicle shall wear the safety belt assembly in a properly adjusted and securely fastened manner.
(8) The state patrol may adopt rules exempting operators or occupants of farm vehicles, construction equipment, and vehicles that are required to make frequent stops from the requirement of wearing safety belts.
Post by: Glockster on November 03, 2010, 01:45:06 PM
SPD could run radar on I-5, but they leave that to WSP because they have many other things to do.
During Seafair (Sea-Fear) weekend there are atleast 4 WDFW vessels out on LK WA working BUI/public safety, which means those 4 vessels and 12 officers (plus a sergeant and I even saw a Capt.) are not working fish/wildlife.
My question is why is WDFW doing ANY non-Fish/Wildlife enforcement if their resources are so stretched? Afterall, we never see other agencies come to help them work the Elk opener or Lk WA Sockeye.
Post by: bigtex on November 03, 2010, 07:29:04 PM
During Seafair (Sea-Fear) weekend there are atleast 4 WDFW vessels out on LK WA working BUI/public safety, which means those 4 vessels and 12 officers (plus a sergeant and I even saw a Capt.) are not working fish/wildlife.
My question is why is WDFW doing ANY non-Fish/Wildlife enforcement if their resources are so stretched? Afterall, we never see other agencies come to help them work the Elk opener or Lk WA Sockeye.
During SeaFair WDFW puts out 4 vessels (2 are actually federal vessels that WDFW regularly uses) that are captained by a WDFW Officer. On each vessel are the WDFW Officer, a WSP Trooper, and a US Coast Guard officer. The WDFW Officer drives the vessel, WSP does the breathalyzer and USCG handles a lot of the boating issues. So not all of the officers on WDFW boats are actually WDFW Officers.
The reason why WDFW works SeaFair is because they are required to do so in order to receive the $200k grant for boating enforcement that they get from State Parks. State Parks is the lead boating enforcement agency in the state and gives grants for law enforcement agencies to do boating enforcement, WDFW gets the most money.
During SeaFair WDFW, Seattle PD, Kent PD, Mercer Island PD, King County SO and the USCG all provide vessels for patrol.
So once again the reason why they work SeaFair is because they would not get a $200k grant if they didn’t work it.
Post by: Glockster on November 04, 2010, 11:41:25 AM
I'm a USCG licensed capt and operate vessel for hire on Lk WA so I'm well familiar with the (wide) variety of police agencies on the lake. '08 Seafear I did see a WDFW vessel with Capt. Hebner, Sgt Chandler and one WDFW officer on the same boat. They were all aboard the WDFW #25 the uc Grady White.
I still think that's a bit brass heavy for one boat.
Also doesn't WS Parks have their own commissioned now?
Post by: Tony 270 on November 04, 2010, 11:49:48 AM
During SeaFair WDFW, Seattle PD, Kent PD, Mercer Island PD, King County SO and the USCG all provide vessels for patrol.
So once again the reason why they work SeaFair is because they would not get a $200k grant if they didn’t work it.
Probably has something to do with the number of boaters out that weekend along with the amounts of alcohol out as well :twocents:
Post by: jackelope on November 04, 2010, 12:17:50 PM
Thanks for the info Big Tex. It's all about the Benjamins for sure!
I'm a USCG licensed capt and operate vessel for hire on Lk WA so I'm well familiar with the (wide) variety of police agencies on the lake. '08 Seafear I did see a WDFW vessel with Capt. Hebner, Sgt Chandler and one WDFW officer on the same boat. They were all aboard the WDFW #25 the uc Grady White.
I still think that's a bit brass heavy for one boat.
Also doesn't WS Parks have their own commissioned now?
Did you also see the Border Patrol there? I did.
Why I ask, was the Border Patrol patrolling Seafair?
I would guess for the same reason WDFW was.
Post by: jackelope on November 04, 2010, 12:21:52 PM
Quote
Who really gives a $hit what someone calls them? Not everyone is a cop groupy like you.
Quote
I'm talking about on this forum. When I speak to a game warden or any other officer I'm very respectful and always call them "officer".
Quote
And there you have it. Im respectful because I don't want them to make up some b.s.. respect is a 2 way street. I would actually respect them if they treated me with respect. I have rarely been treated with respect by Leo's even though I always am respectful to them. They just act like I'm there to serve them. It's their job to serve the public not the other way around. There are a few good ones and I truly respect those gentlemen/women
Good thing bigtex is here to straighten everybody out. Since he wasn't there he obviously knows.... good thing he's on this site. Just imagine how uninformed we would be with out him. Since he's not ignorant they everyone else on here...
Grundy53,
Every time you post in this thread it becomes more and more clear to me why Law Enforcement seems to treat you with a lack of respect. It's sure no mystery to me.
Post by: grundy53 on November 04, 2010, 12:39:48 PM
QuoteWho really gives a $hit what someone calls them? Not everyone is a cop groupy like you.QuoteI'm talking about on this forum. When I speak to a game warden or any other officer I'm very respectful and always call them "officer".QuoteAnd there you have it. Im respectful because I don't want them to make up some b.s.. respect is a 2 way street. I would actually respect them if they treated me with respect. I have rarely been treated with respect by Leo's even though I always am respectful to them. They just act like I'm there to serve them. It's their job to serve the public not the other way around. There are a few good ones and I truly respect those gentlemen/womenGood thing bigtex is here to straighten everybody out. Since he wasn't there he obviously knows.... good thing he's on this site. Just imagine how uninformed we would be with out him. Since he's not ignorant they everyone else on here...
Grundy53,
Every time you post in this thread it becomes more and more clear to me why Law Enforcement seems to treat you with a lack of respect. It's sure no mystery to me.
How do you figure? When I speak to an officer I am 100% respectful. I say yes sir, I'm polite, and I smile. I'm an adult I know how to act around authority. So how can you even presume to know why I get treated the way I do? Does it have to be my fault? Are they above reproach? You ever think that maybe I used to really look up to them until I got treated like *censored*? It's not every officer either only about half the time. So how do you explain that if I have such a bad attitude? You know what they say about when you ASSume.... but good to know you've done your research and pasted together a few clips of mine that were directed at a certain individual out of the nearly thousand posts of mine. Nice.
Post by: jackelope on November 04, 2010, 12:58:26 PM
Opinions are like *censored*s. Everybody's got one, some stink worse than others.
Post by: grundy53 on November 04, 2010, 01:02:11 PM
Just basing my opinions off of your comments. Same for what you're doing with Bigtex's comments.
Opinions are like *censored*s. Everybody's got one, some stink worse than others.
Actually your basing them off one thread. I wasn't. Nice broad analysis you did. Your right though some stink worse then others....
Post by: bigtex on November 04, 2010, 03:35:56 PM
Thanks for the info Big Tex. It's all about the Benjamins for sure!
I'm a USCG licensed capt and operate vessel for hire on Lk WA so I'm well familiar with the (wide) variety of police agencies on the lake. '08 Seafear I did see a WDFW vessel with Capt. Hebner, Sgt Chandler and one WDFW officer on the same boat. They were all aboard the WDFW #25 the uc Grady White.
I still think that's a bit brass heavy for one boat.
Also doesn't WS Parks have their own commissioned now?
Ya in 08 WDFW had only planned on having three boats I believe but they (all the agencies combined) needed more manpower so thats why they brought in the boat with Hebner and Chandler and I think they only worked the final day of the event. WDFW Sgts are suppose to work patrol, Capts are primarily desk jobs but do get to patrol when time allows.
All State Park Rangers are comissioned officers but they can only use their authority on state park lands. Which is why you usually just see them doing boat checks at state park boat ramps. The only time they can leave park lands to enforce laws is when somebody commits a serious crime on park lands and flees out of the park. The state park admin isn't too keen on rangers writing citations.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on November 04, 2010, 03:49:16 PM
:) A female Game agent in Fruitland area was puling people over and citing them for no seatbelt!!
Carl
Speaking of seatbelt laws.....am I required to wear a seatbelt when out on gravel roads (DNR or Weyerhauser land)? It makes it a lot slower to have to unbuckle my seat-belt before I jump out of the truck to shoot a deer. I don't want to get a ticket from a Warden for not having a seat-belt on, but sometimes when out scouting in Capital Forest or wherever I may take the seat-belt off for a while on the back roads.
Our Game Warden says "you do not have wear a seatbelt when off of Public roads " this means you don't have to wear them on forest service rds etc. He should know, but ask BIGTEX to get it clarified first.
Post by: Curly on November 04, 2010, 03:53:40 PM
BTW - it was a serious question, and I was joking about the road hunting situation.......(in case anybody had any doubt).
Post by: bigtex on November 04, 2010, 03:57:24 PM
USFS roads are considered public roads (as well as BLM, DNR & WDFW roads) and all traffic laws must be followed, in fact the USFS does a lot of traffic enforcement on their lands. One of the top DUI officers in Pierce County is a USFS Officer.
As far as private timberland roads it comes to be a little tricky because state motor vehicle laws regulate public roads. However as I have said most timber companies (I know Hancock does for sure) require that you follow all state traffic laws while on their lands, and if you violate the law you can be charged with trespass.
What are the chances of getting a ticket by a WDFW Officer on Weyerhaeuser or other private timber company lands for no seat belt? Very minimal. However it is great probable cause to pull you over and talk to you.
When on USFS or BLM lands their officers do a lot of traffic enforcement so the chances are higher of not only being pulled over but also cited for no seat belt.
Post by: bigtex on November 04, 2010, 03:59:14 PM
Thanks Campmeat. I was hoping somebody would know the answer. I figured Bigtex would have known, but maybe he didn't see the question.
BTW - it was a serious question, and I was joking about the road hunting situation.......(in case anybody had any doubt).
I also answered this question on the previous page....
Post by: Curly on November 04, 2010, 04:09:51 PM
Sorry I missed it on the previous page.......a lot of info and hard to keep up sometimes. :P
(I see I missed a whole half of a page......)
Post by: CAMPMEAT on November 05, 2010, 07:40:36 AM
Post by: bigtex on November 05, 2010, 02:19:04 PM
I have actually seen a Forest Circus cop running radar off of Skate Creek going into Packwood years ago. That's the only one I've ever seen. I NEVER see Forest Circus cops in the woods here, NEVER !!!
Ya they are pretty limited in numbers. Right now all USFS Ranger Stations in WA have one officer, the Randle District is the only station with two officers. BLM only has two officers to cover all of eastern washington.
Post by: nontypical176 on November 05, 2010, 09:15:48 PM
Post by: ser300wsm on November 05, 2010, 09:34:26 PM
Post by: bigtex on November 05, 2010, 10:01:00 PM
Done, but........what a crappy survey, there should be a comment area so those of us that have positive suggestions to make can make suggestions. Seems like thats what the survey was about I think. It says check 3 things at one point, but nothing I wanted to check was on there. I'm sure the WDFW can pay people to find out what we think and fix the problems....Baa ha ha haaaaa. What a joke.
Read the bottom of the survey.....
"To submit recommendations and suggestions for improvement, please send your comments to enfcomments@dfw.wa.gov."
Post by: nontypical176 on November 06, 2010, 05:23:51 AM
Post by: billythekidrock on November 06, 2010, 05:40:14 AM
Yeah, I seen that there. Heres my thought, they have a survey out thats getting lots of responses and probably some useflull information, look how many people on here alone have filled it out, but the survey lacks the real depth it needs to be much more than toilet paper. I can think of several good questions easy and I'm not gettin paid to make a worth while survey.
If you really look at the survey you will find that the "usefull information" is there. The survey is objective based with the objective of saving or gaining enforcement positions and dollars.
Post by: krout81 on November 06, 2010, 05:41:31 AM
Post by: bigtex on November 06, 2010, 05:32:08 PM
A warden once yelled at me and said "You don't prioritize my time." and went storming off.
Well it is true. None of us set their priorites. The agency sets what their officers priorities should be, and right now there is a lot of "priority" with commercial enforcement.
Post by: Special T on November 06, 2010, 08:40:45 PM
Post by: bigpaw 77 on November 06, 2010, 08:48:22 PM
Post by: MLBowhunting on November 06, 2010, 09:14:26 PM
Post by: csaaphill on November 17, 2010, 12:01:51 AM
Post by: Tman on November 18, 2010, 06:34:43 PM
Done. some of you know that I called the Game Warden's cell to report a poacher on my property a few weeks ago. I left him a message because he did not answer. He never even gave me a call back, that goes to show that there are not enough enforcement officers in the state. I have only seen two of them EVER while hunting in WA. When I was guiding in Wyoming we would see them at all the trail heads and they would even ride into our camp to check tags and see how things were going. But that is a state that actually cares about managing their wildlife.
I would've called the local sheriffs department, they are quicker to respond to trespassers.