Post by: Special T on December 27, 2010, 11:54:47 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 27, 2010, 12:00:43 PM
Post by: whacker1 on December 27, 2010, 12:01:26 PM
Pheasants Forever, Ducks Unlimited, Boone & Crocket, Pope & Young, SCI, Mule Deer Foundation, WFNWSA (Sheep), Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, etc. I am sure that I missed several Whitetail, mountain goat and other clubs. And I haven't even touched fishing clubs / associations.
I agree that a unified voice is needed in every state. These clubs are better at coordinating federal lobbying efforts, but still not great.
Individual Recruitment is an even larger issue.
Post by: FC on December 27, 2010, 12:01:46 PM
Post by: Bean Counter on December 27, 2010, 12:08:38 PM
Conservatives tend to have lives, jobs, and be married. We tend to be more optimistic and look for the best in what we have, you know--gratitude. In my view, generally speaking, liberals tend to lack jobs, children, and a normal life. There is more complaining and that revolutionary push within them. That makes them easier to organize, get bitchy, and protest.
Just think of all the "George W Bush is a moron" protests we saw during 2000-2008. "Hey guys, lets have a protest!" ... "yeah!" Well there are plenty of conservatives who don't like BHO. "Hey guys, what to have a protest?" .... "Uh, well, I have to go to work, and the kids have a baseball game tonight, and there's church the next night..."
Post by: NWWABOWHNTR on December 27, 2010, 12:20:01 PM
As archers we do have a voice. The WSAA, the Traditional Bowhunters of Washington (TBW) and the Washington State Bowhunters, all are very active in representing all archers and our requests to the WDFW. They have also formed a Washington State Archery Coalition with board members from all 3 organizations working together to advocate for the archer/bowhunter. Is this enough? NO. Keep an eye on the WDFW website and attend the public meetings! This is a way to get your voice heard. Email the WDFW with your ideas, complaints and suggestions! Of course if you have complaints, have constructive ideas on how or what needs to be done to make it better! THis is a very important time to start your lobbying as the WDFW will start holding meetings in regards to the next 3 year hunting plans. BE RELENTLOUS! Don't just shoot an email and forget about it, they are very good at "forgetting" your email, if they don't answer your email, call them.
Post by: 6x6in6 on December 27, 2010, 12:28:39 PM
I'm not saying myself that it is a waste of time, because it is not.
Just saying that is the view of most.
Post by: Dave Workman on December 27, 2010, 06:38:45 PM
First and foremost, among our ranks are quite a few selfish sell-outs; people who plant their noses so far up WDFW's rump they cannot see nor hear what is going on, not that it would make much difference; so long as "they get theirs," so to speak. They LIKE the idea of trimming seasons and discouraging other hunters. The LIKE to think of themselves as noble outdoorsmen interested in the resource. They are :liar:
I blame a lot of this on Resource Allocation (yep, I know the WDFW people read these threads to see what we're saying. Heck, even Phil Anderson called me up about a week ago over something that, as it turned out, I had nothing to do with.) Resource Allocation pits user groups against one another and divides them so they are not united to hold the department accountable for the poor seasons and poor management.
And don't buy this crap about Washington running out of land and habitat. It's a crock that has been allowed to flourish because nobody has taken the time to sit down and just haul out maps and look at all the public lands we have that cover winter, summer and transition range.
This is where I get politically insulting to some people here. Your choices when voting for legislators and governors simply sucks. Elect Democrats, expect a fish & wildlife commission to be made up of people who may not have any use for sportfishing or hunting, or people who do it. I run into people all the time who are gun owners and hunters, and didn't vote for Dino Rossi because he's a this or that. So they vote for Queen Christine and look at the commission we have.
They vote for Democrat legislators who are no more likely to hold the WDFW accountable for what many people believe is just piss poor management because it conflicts with their "big picture" outlook. Translation: they answer to greenies and fur huggers, and their interests are hardly our interests.
If you want a voice in Olympia, you need to put the right people in office, people who will listen to you instead of some wolf-lover.
See some of my other comments in other threads. If hunters can kill more than 200,000 whitetail deer in Ohio during a season, WTF is wrong here?
Answer: Everything.
We aren't "blessed" with a bunny hugging government. Some of our own helped elect that government, and they are cutting their own throats.
Post by: Little Dave on December 27, 2010, 07:10:15 PM
Post by: high country on December 27, 2010, 07:15:04 PM
Post by: bobcat on December 27, 2010, 07:31:25 PM
Post by: Bob33 on December 27, 2010, 07:39:21 PM
Here's an example: if every licensed hunter in the state voted in the last presidential election, and if they all voted for John McCain, it wouldn't have made a bit of difference in the outcome in Washington. Do you believe that all the hunters in the state could overcome the corruption in King County to elect a 2nd amendment governor?
This state is liberal, and 3 percent of the population are licensed hunters.
I don't know this, but I suspect that hunters are more involved in voting than non-hunters. It's just that there aren't enough to make much of a difference.
Post by: GlennGTR on December 27, 2010, 07:48:58 PM
Post by: bobcat on December 27, 2010, 07:51:03 PM
I ran for State Representative in the 35th district. Does that count?
No, not if you didn't win. :chuckle:
Post by: GlennGTR on December 27, 2010, 08:01:14 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on December 27, 2010, 08:04:25 PM
I will be running again and starting my campaign in November, getting a couple of months head start on my competition. If you want a hard core hunter, flyfisherman and conservative, then suport me in my next election bid. 8)For what office?
Post by: ser300wsm on December 27, 2010, 08:06:40 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 27, 2010, 08:21:04 PM
Post by: rasbo on December 27, 2010, 08:25:33 PM
Post by: singleshot12 on December 27, 2010, 08:29:20 PM
Post by: Jerbear on December 27, 2010, 09:19:51 PM
Stupid policy. Well let me see. A recent example was ending deer season on a Friday. That last week end could have been a chance to take the kids out one more time. That last week end could have meant more money for small towns like Goldendale to make more money, in an tight economy.
As you may or may not know, the female in charge of the Klickitat Wildlife Area, closes the gates the day after deer season. So before the appointed day, I called and ask why it could not go a few more days for elk season. She said she was closing the gates and that was it. so I called her boss in Olympia, and after explaining the situation, refereed me to the Wildlife Areas manager in Vancouver. Ah yes. another female. Now I had ask all three about allowing disabled hunters to drive in. A big no. The Vancouver person had been alerted and commenced to tell me haw we had to protect the resources. That land is Game land and DNR land. But by God Bobcat, we bought it and we own it. These organizations operate in their own way, and our legislators don't have a clue.
By the way, the local gal and the Vancouver person, neither of them hunt. But they show a lot of interest in the Oregon spotted frog and the western Pond Turtle I think the first official act of the Dept of F&W every morning is to do their official dance. that would be the HOKEY POKEY. I take that back. Trying to figure out their left arm out and then back would confuse them to such a degree, they would go out on disability.
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on December 27, 2010, 09:58:00 PM
Ya, you need to tell them what office GLENGTR.... :chuckle:
He did: State Representative for the 35th District. The fact that he's here shows that he's concerned about our plight. BTW, I voted for Rossi, even though I think he represents what I think is wrong with government-- CAREER POLITICIANS! But better a conservative career politician than a Patty or a Christine!
Post by: bobcat on December 27, 2010, 10:00:53 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on December 27, 2010, 10:02:02 PM
Key word "next election bid"I will be running again and starting my campaign in November, getting a couple of months head start on my competition. If you want a hard core hunter, flyfisherman and conservative, then suport me in my next election bid. 8)For what office?
Post by: bearpaw on December 27, 2010, 10:36:43 PM
Well Jerry, I'm not sure what to say to that. I don't disagree. There are a lot of things the WDFW could do to make things better for us hunters. But, in a lot of ways their hands are tied. A couple of major issues, the tribal hunting/poaching problem, and the predator problem we have no effective way to manage them with having the option of hound hunting being taken away by the voters of the state. I was just trying to point out that it's not 1975 anymore, we have a lot more people in the state, a lot more predators, and less deer and elk.
It's more like in a lot of ways "Their minds are made up on how they want to do things." For example in the Draft Wolf Plan, they are forcing 15 breeding pairs onto this state. I think every choice they gave included 15 BP's. Essentually they are giving us no choice except how we distribute the 15 bp's. It's the WDFW that is promoting another predator into Washington. I suggest you rethink your statement bobcat and reconsider what Dave Workman more accurately stated. :twocents:
They could tell the people of Washington the truth, "The more wolves we have in Washington, the more deer and elk will be eaten. Let's only meet federal guidlines for a minimum of wolves to protect our herds."
But that is not their position is it?
Post by: Wacenturion on December 27, 2010, 11:19:20 PM
Well Jerry, I'm not sure what to say to that. I don't disagree. There are a lot of things the WDFW could do to make things better for us hunters. But, in a lot of ways their hands are tied. A couple of major issues, the tribal hunting/poaching problem, and the predator problem we have no effective way to manage them with having the option of hound hunting being taken away by the voters of the state. I was just trying to point out that it's not 1975 anymore, we have a lot more people in the state, a lot more predators, and less deer and elk.
WDFW's hands are not tied. Their management agenda is directed by choice and lack of not knowing how to do things efficiently. They use science as a deflector for reasonable approaches to solving resource issues. Money is wasted in most areas by over management and too many cooks in the kitchen...or too many chiefs and not enough indians.
Dave is spot on.........like it or not. Your view of WDFW, the resource and what we have to accept is tainted. Stop drinking the department's kool aid.....it's not good for you. The whole agency needs reform......enough said.
The example above of the Klickitat and WDFW's response from the quoted sources is sad. It's become an individual's wildlife area....not yours. That female manager works for you....but unfortunately all those tree hugger types now entrenched in WDFW, think otherwise.
Post by: Little Dave on December 28, 2010, 12:51:22 AM
If by deception the public had approved an initiative to ban childhood immunization, clearly such a law would need to be overturned. In doing so, we would expect the health departments to take leadership in that action. Our Department of Fish and Wildlife has not been vocal enough nor effective in the last fourteen years in the need to condemn the hound hunting ban and its ill effects. By now it should have taken a strong leadership role in steering the legislature to find a way to fix the problem. Clearly the legislature has found ways around other voter approved initiatives.
Post by: Bean Counter on December 28, 2010, 09:16:16 AM
I ran for State Representative in the 35th district. Does that count?
No, not if you didn't win. :chuckle:
It takes big cahones to run for pubic office. I respect anyone who throws their hat in the ring.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on December 28, 2010, 09:24:19 AM
Post by: Special T on December 28, 2010, 09:56:20 AM
There is a saying in Sales that the quality of a salesman IS NOT when everything is going well, but rather how they handle themselves when something is going wrong... When one of my customers has a problem i MUST engage them by finding out more about the problem and why my customer is have issues... IF that was what the WDFW was doing they would be reaching out instead of entrenching in their bureaucratic bunker...
If i was in charge of the WDFW or in some kind of influential capacity here are some of the things i would do REGAURDLESS of weather i could make any headway on hunter/fisherman issues...
1 Engage the hunting& fishing community. In an official or unofficial capacity get knowledgeable employees to Discuss topics on forums such as this one.... Newspapers and or television.. Part of the WDFW role is Education... It can take many forms...
2 Air out the problems and road blocks... Just on this forum we have people that dedicate lots of time into researching topics... Not just opinions but ferreting out documentable facts or studies done by 3rd parties... People often site tribes as major road blocks to management of our resources... Well I know all the tribes aren't the same and there are success with some of them... Could there be something to LEARN if the facts were before us?
3 find out/ask what it would take to make things right? In my business if a customer wants new product AND their money back i politely tell them its not an option or possible... If the customer wants a reimbursement or discount on product then we talk... It called ENGAGING THE CUSTOMER!
I don't see the WDFW doing things that resemble what I'm talking about... If the WDFW said they couldn't do something and why, then answered some questions it would elevate lots of problems.... :twocents:
Post by: Buckrub on December 28, 2010, 10:02:28 AM
Well Jerry, I'm not sure what to say to that. I don't disagree. There are a lot of things the WDFW could do to make things better for us hunters. But, in a lot of ways their hands are tied. A couple of major issues, the tribal hunting/poaching problem, and the predator problem we have no effective way to manage them with having the option of hound hunting being taken away by the voters of the state. I was just trying to point out that it's not 1975 anymore, we have a lot more people in the state, a lot more predators, and less deer and elk.
The hound hunting and baiting was by initiative and can be overturned after two years... Our game dept. has no backbone in real management and cowers to the bunny huggers. The predators are wiping out deer and elk populations and the dept. still wants to introduce wolf populations????
The one and only way to influence the dept. is with money in the form of boycotting and we are close to a mass Exodus.
It is not 1975 anymore but sound game management should be better, rather than revenue driven poor management.
The tribes are not the problem, the problem lies within the dept.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on December 29, 2010, 08:29:59 AM
Post by: Stomper on December 29, 2010, 08:53:40 AM
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on December 29, 2010, 08:54:41 AM
Well Jerry, I'm not sure what to say to that. I don't disagree. There are a lot of things the WDFW could do to make things better for us hunters. But, in a lot of ways their hands are tied. A couple of major issues, the tribal hunting/poaching problem, and the predator problem we have no effective way to manage them with having the option of hound hunting being taken away by the voters of the state. I was just trying to point out that it's not 1975 anymore, we have a lot more people in the state, a lot more predators, and less deer and elk.
WDFW's hands are not tied. Their management agenda is directed by choice and lack of not knowing how to do things efficiently. They use science as a deflector for reasonable approaches to solving resource issues. Money is wasted in most areas by over management and too many cooks in the kitchen...or too many chiefs and not enough indians.
Dave is spot on.........like it or not. Your view of WDFW, the resource and what we have to accept is tainted. Stop drinking the department's kool aid.....it's not good for you. The whole agency needs reform......enough said.
The example above of the Klickitat and WDFW's response from the quoted sources is sad. It's become an individual's wildlife area....not yours. That female manager works for you....but unfortunately all those tree hugger types now entrenched in WDFW, think otherwise.
I'll throw my :twocents: in here. To figure things out, you have to go back to the root of the problem. How do you think those tree-hugger types got intrenched?
Simple, they have taken over our schools and Universities. Until you fix that problem, all else is just spitting into the wind.
Post by: Special T on December 29, 2010, 10:08:42 AM
Post by: Mr T on December 29, 2010, 10:25:56 AM
So how do we start an intiative to reverse the intiative of the past. We don't have much say in final game management decisions, we can't control the winter weather, but we can possibly do something to put the cougar population back to a number that is not impacting the der populations as much. How do we do it, how much does it cost, what are timelines? :dunno:
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on December 29, 2010, 10:30:46 AM
Never once could we get the true information out that they are not allowing us to manage the cats the way we know best.
Not some know-nothing liberal studying at some know-nothing college where they are brainwashed of their common sense.
Post by: KeeKeeBlamo on December 29, 2010, 10:32:48 AM
Post by: Mr T on December 29, 2010, 10:42:03 AM
Yet, we have a forum of people hear that can easily work together as "one" if decided upon. This sight could also be a place to "gather the troops" and decide on one thing to work at changing each year for the Washington Sportsmen and women.
How do we do it? I am not sure. Any advice?
Post by: Stomper on December 29, 2010, 10:49:13 AM
Post by: Mr T on December 29, 2010, 10:54:35 AM
Post by: Stomper on December 29, 2010, 11:03:26 AM
Post by: Stomper on December 29, 2010, 11:13:58 AM
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on December 29, 2010, 11:22:53 AM
Mouthing off is one of the things we can do to, if nothing else, let our voices be heard.
Mouthing off is one of the biggest weapons we have and thank God we have our Constitution to protect that right.
The other idea is good also, but there needs to be objects defined and things we all agree upon or we are just gonna end up fighting amongst ourselves.
Post by: bobcat on December 29, 2010, 12:23:51 PM
Quote
Game Regulations for 2011
The Department is considering rule making for the following: Game management unit boundaries; deer and elk area boundaries; deer, elk, mountain goat, bighorn sheep, moose, cougar, black bear, and turkey seasons and permit levels; special closures and firearm restriction areas; harvest reporting; trapping regulations; and private lands public access.
Attached below is a pdf which has contact information for those interested in being involved in the process. Looks like there is a deadline of Janury 10th.
Post by: Stomper on December 29, 2010, 12:33:43 PM
Post by: villageidiot on December 29, 2010, 09:37:07 PM
Problem solved, lets get it done.
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on December 29, 2010, 09:42:27 PM
I have thought about our biggest problem with WDFW. We are partially funded by the legislature. We are funded by 75% by selling hunting and fishing licenses. I think if WDFW refused to take any more state money then we could also refuse any advice or even a game commission appointed by the governor. No more having to accept initiatives to change wildlife laws. This is like any state or federal money. Schools receive federal and state money and with it comes all these mandates and rules you have to follow to get the candy. If WDFW quit taking state money they could start managing game again and have a commission which is strictly hunters and fishermen, period. We could reinstate hound hunting, reinstate trapping, reinstate bear bateing. All three of these are extremely efficient in taking specific types and sexes of game. Most of WDFW land was purchased with Pittman Robertson money which is 100% tax money from selling hunting and trapping supplies so belongs to these groups and not any birdwatching group. WDFW would be 25% short of funds but that would be a very simple problem to solve. Get rid of nearly every single biologist and there are hundreds of them. Most of them are looking for snails, rare fish, butterflies and every creature known to man that they might get put on the endangered species list to shut down hunting and fishing. Get rid of them and we save way more than the 25% we will lose from the legislature plus the added bonus of not paying a bunch of so called scientists to CUT OUR THROATS.
Problem solved, lets get it done.
Boy did you say something important there that I wish more people understood.
Nothing is free from the government. First they have to steal it from someone else to have any in the first place, then when you accept $$$ from the government, you've now lost your freedom. They are gonna hold that over you and tell you how to run your life/school/business/etc....
sorry, back to your regularly schedule program.
Post by: Special T on December 29, 2010, 09:46:20 PM
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on December 29, 2010, 09:51:10 PM
100%... anything to get grant $$$ out of it. We could spend hours talking about the things grants $$$ has corrupted.
Post by: villageidiot on December 30, 2010, 06:40:28 AM
WDFW could easily be a self sustaining organization that could manage wildlife very well without politics destroying it, have better hunting, save species, more game for viewers, happy hunters and fishermen.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on December 30, 2010, 07:48:49 AM
How about all of us join together at there meetings so we can be heard!I'm pretty sure alot of us would like an excuse like going to a meeting,to B.S afterwards with our friends on this website.Maybe buy a bunch of Hunting Washington Sweatshirts or tshirts to wear there.I'm talking like everyone...we will be heard if we come in numbers. :dunno:
Next meeting.....................
Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission
600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/ (http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/)
December 23, 2010
Contacts: Susan Galloway, (360) 902-2267 (commission)
Craig Bartlett, (360) 902-2259 (WDFW)
Commission will consider sturgeon policy,
hear from public on Elwha fishing proposal
OLYMPIA - The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission will consider adoption of new management guidelines that address the declining abundance of Columbia River white sturgeon during a public meeting here Jan. 7-8.
The commission, which sets policy for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), also will discuss Puget Sound crab-fishing seasons and hold a public hearing on a proposed fishing moratorium associated with the removal of two dams on the Elwha River.
The commission will convene at 8:30 a.m. both days in Room 172 on the first floor of the Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington St. S.E., in Olympia. A complete meeting agenda is available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings.html (http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings.html) on the commission's website.
On the second day of the meeting, the commission will consider adopting a policy to guide WDFW in negotiating a joint three-year management agreement with Oregon for sturgeon fisheries on the lower Columbia River.
Fishery managers from both states have expressed concerns about declines in sturgeon abundance in recent years, and have recommended a 30 percent reduction in harvest levels for sport and commercial fisheries below Bonneville Dam from 2011 through 2013. Final decisions on harvest levels and fishing seasons are expected in early February.
Meanwhile, with two major dams on the Elwha River scheduled for removal starting in 2011, the commission will accept public comments on a proposed fishing moratorium designed to support restoration of native salmon and trout populations in that watershed.
WDFW, in conjunction with tribal and federal fishery managers, has proposed a fishing closure in the Elwha River Basin to protect fish during the dam-removal process and encourage their expansion into 70 miles of new spawning and rearing habitat.
The commission is scheduled to make a decision on the proposed fishing moratorium at its Feb. 4-5 meeting in Olympia, where it will also consider adopting new sport-crabbing regulations for Puget Sound.
In October, the commission approved a new crab-fishing policy designed to expand sport-fishing opportunities for Puget Sound crabbers. At their upcoming meeting, the commission will receive a briefing from WDFW fish managers that focuses on how the proposed crab regulations conform to the new policy.
In other matters, WDFW will brief the commission on issues regarding the state's Columbia River summer chinook policy; the North of Falcon season-setting policy; the Commission for Persons with Disabilities Advisory Committee; and the department's "Turn in a Poacher" program.
Post by: ICEMAN on December 30, 2010, 07:14:45 PM
Hunters lack apathy.
ap·a·thy n.
1. Lack of interest or concern, especially regarding matters of general importance or appeal; indifference.
2. Lack of emotion or feeling; impassiveness.
Look at all the hype about the legislature taking away gun rights last year. How many guys from this site made it to the 2nd Amendment Rally at the capital grounds in Olympia last April. I believe only three of us, ADAMS, Rasbo and myself.
Guys seem willing to accept the constant degradation of their priveledges in face of gains by the tribes and the whacko left. Hunters have diminishing Apathy. It seems most are giving up. I fear it is not true.
Post by: GlennGTR on December 30, 2010, 07:27:17 PM
I ran for State Representative in the 35th district. Does that count? :P I have also worked with my legislators to close areas to brush picking because of the harm that most of these guys are doing to our hunting areas. Trash, illegal timber product harvest, poaching, and meth production...these are some of my environmental concerns.
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on December 30, 2010, 07:28:18 PM
We wouldn't have to spend 25% more because many of these Ologists hired by WDFW are a mandate required that is attached to some of the money they receive. We will give you this money but you have to hire X number of ologists to monitor this butterfly or spotted frog or wolf. We don't accept the money and we eliminate these ologists which are a cancer to our own organization because they are trying to gather data that they plan on useing to destroy us. Any scientific data can be manipulated to do what you want and along with the ologists we hire we are given specific data we expect them to acquire which is predesignated by the holders of the money bag. We now have the wolverine on the endangered species list as of recently and just today I read on this board about a guy in Alaska that sold a 52 lb. wolverine hide for 900 bucks to a fur buyer. They are not endangered.
WDFW could easily be a self sustaining organization that could manage wildlife very well without politics destroying it, have better hunting, save species, more game for viewers, happy hunters and fishermen.
You couldn't be more right. It's rare I met someone who articulates the problems so well.
What this all boils down to for me is states handling their own affairs.... The Fed has no business managing "our" game or anything else, but when you accept $$$ from them, that is exactly what happens. It is upside down from what our Constitution intends. Fed has a very limited roll, theoretically.
Heck, just look at what centralized power is doing right now. The corrupt EPA is going around congress and doing as it wishes without any way for We The People to stop them.
Anway, as in all cissues of self-governance, we should tell the Fed to keep it's money and we'll keep our freedom.
Post by: bearpaw on December 31, 2010, 08:59:37 AM
I have thought about our biggest problem with WDFW. We are partially funded by the legislature. We are funded by 75% by selling hunting and fishing licenses. I think if WDFW refused to take any more state money then we could also refuse any advice or even a game commission appointed by the governor. No more having to accept initiatives to change wildlife laws. This is like any state or federal money. Schools receive federal and state money and with it comes all these mandates and rules you have to follow to get the candy. If WDFW quit taking state money they could start managing game again and have a commission which is strictly hunters and fishermen, period. We could reinstate hound hunting, reinstate trapping, reinstate bear bateing. All three of these are extremely efficient in taking specific types and sexes of game. Most of WDFW land was purchased with Pittman Robertson money which is 100% tax money from selling hunting and trapping supplies so belongs to these groups and not any birdwatching group. WDFW would be 25% short of funds but that would be a very simple problem to solve. Get rid of nearly every single biologist and there are hundreds of them. Most of them are looking for snails, rare fish, butterflies and every creature known to man that they might get put on the endangered species list to shut down hunting and fishing. Get rid of them and we save way more than the 25% we will lose from the legislature plus the added bonus of not paying a bunch of so called scientists to CUT OUR THROATS.
Problem solved, lets get it done.
I was involved in a WDFW working group last year. A question that was brought up is where funding comes from. WDFW brought in the figures for all to see. Funding comes from numerous sources, I don't remember exact percentages but roughly speaking, 1/3 from legislature and invested funds, 1/3 from (Pittman/Dingle) federal taxes on sporting goods returned to states, 1/3 from license/tag sales. I was astounded to learn that less than half the funding comes from license and tag sales. This is the reason hunters and fishers do not have as strong of voice as we would like.
Post by: villageidiot on December 31, 2010, 09:49:21 AM
Sad!
Post by: bearpaw on December 31, 2010, 09:58:20 AM
The hunter safety handbook is where it states that 75% of funding comes from selling hunting and fishing licenses. It is possible they combine Pittman Robertson money in that catagory also which would put it around the 70% range. Pittman Robertson is also hunter generted money so that would only mean WDFW would be forfeiting around 30%. This still could be done by eliminating all the ologist jobs that seem to be a cancer to the dept. because they are trying to generate ESA listings that in the end destroy hunting along with nearly all resource users such as logging, mining, gravel pits, ranching and farming. If we don't eventually start producing some products to sell we will starve. China is selling the whole world products now and the fastest growing economy on the earth. The U.S. is rapidly falling off the cliff due largely to govt. regulations (such as ESA listings) that increase the cost of producing and even make producing anything cost prohibitive.
Sad!
Problem is I've been told that they get extra funds to manage these "listed species" yes, they are making money off wolves coming to Washington. :bash:
It's as if they could care less about everything else when extra dollars come into play. :twocents:
Post by: Special T on December 31, 2010, 11:31:29 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 31, 2010, 11:37:22 AM