Mike7
WKR
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2012
- Location
- Northern Idaho
I get emails occasionally from a couple of environmentalist groups that are headquartered in Western Washington (go figure) and are usually asking for donations or some kind of activism participation. They always seem to be for having breeding wolves on almost every inch of Washington, are against all logging, etc. I have to laugh at some of the emails from these groups which make no logical sense seemingly, unless of course the primary mission is to solicit donations and not really manage wildlife.
I thought an email that I got today was interesting. It was from a group that put an Op Ed in the Seattle newspaper regarding Fish & Wildlife needing more money, yet environmentalist groups throughout the rest of the year seem do everything possible to ensure that fish and wildlife has less money from hunters, and is under the thumb of these groups instead of following ecological principals for game management. This Op Ed talks about hunters paying a portion of the amount of the "needed" increase and the rest coming from taxes, but I can't see why hunters would want to pay anything more in Washington under the current situation...other than what they have to pay through increasing Washington State taxes.
Having been a resident of several western states, Washington seems to have one of the poorest values for hunting licenses of any state that I have lived in, and from my view outside the internal workings of the Fish & Wildlife Dept as a customer, one of the poorest ran departments. Hawaii may be more poorly run from my interactions, and California might be a worse value, but I am not so sure about that. Washington Fish & Wildlife doesn't want to be anything like Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, or even Oregon (at least from my experience communicating with them), who all seem to value hunters (the main paying group) at least somewhat as an important special interest group in the wildlife management process.
ARTICLE
Lawmakers, stop underfunding Fish and Wildlife, the agency that protects our lands and water
Now is the time to invest in conservation and outdoor opportunity, not continue to shortchange the legacy we hold in trust for future generations.
By Rachel Voss, Mitch Friedman and Butch Smith
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is like a wild goose that lays golden eggs. Yet Washingtonians — especially legislators in Olympia — are taking it for granted. We need lawmakers to fully fund the department to fulfill its mission for the Evergreen State’s outdoor enthusiasts and natural heritage.
Doing so yields dividends for state and local economies. While the Legislature has been allocating less than $50 million in tax money annually to WDFW, more than $170 million comes back to Olympia each year from sales taxes on purchases made to enjoy fish and wildlife. What’s more, Washingtonians spend hundreds of millions of dollars fishing, hunting and wildlife watching, often in small towns from Ilwaco to Chewelah — places that really need these dollars and jobs.
Yet, as made plain from headlines about orcas to the grim talk around our campfires, Washington’s wildlife are at risk. Underfunding of WDFW since the Great Recession hinders the ability to respond. All told, these natural resources comprise under one percent of the state’s overall budget.
It’s astounding that we expect WDFW to manage and let us enjoy everything from salmon and elk to wolves and waterfowl for what amounts to a rounding error for the state.
In 2017, the department alerted the legislature to its $15 million per year funding gap. Legislators were skeptical, demanding an audit and oversight. WDFW assembled a Budget and Policy Advisory Group with more than 20 diverse stakeholders, including the three of us. An independent audit showed that the department compared well with other state agencies and found no significant fat to trim.
After reviewing the audit, we’ve taken aim at the real problem of underfunding, which has exacerbated fish and wildlife declines, generating understandable frustration. While we’re used to competing over things like salmon allocations or wolf management, we all depend on WDFW being successful.
This year we’ve asked the Legislature to increase WDFW’s two-year budget by $60 million. A quarter of that would come from modest fishing and hunting license increases, the rest from the state.
The fact is, we ask a lot of our Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Washington’s growing population puts unrelenting pressure on our land and waters. From resident orcas to spring Chinook, we’re seeing biodiversity and habitat lost faster than they can be recovered. Hikers and bikers are looking to state wildlife areas as trailheads get increasingly crowded. Hunters and anglers, who provide conservation funding through licenses and special taxes on their equipment, are wondering whether their children and grandchildren can continue cherished outdoor traditions.
All of us are demanding healthy ecosystems and abundant fish and wildlife. But if we want the department to hold back the tide, we need to give the agency a bigger bucket.
If you take your kids to jig for squid on the Seattle waterfront, bird watch on the Skagit Delta or photograph mountain goats in the Cascades, the Department of Fish and Wildlife is your agency. If you fly fish for steelhead, troll for salmon or roam the ridges hunting deer, this is your agency. If you want to hear the howl of wolves, and know that officers are protecting them from poachers, this is your agency.
Fish and wildlife are vital to Washington’s quality of life. Now is the time to invest in conservation and outdoor opportunity, not continue to shortchange the legacy we hold in trust for future generations.
I thought an email that I got today was interesting. It was from a group that put an Op Ed in the Seattle newspaper regarding Fish & Wildlife needing more money, yet environmentalist groups throughout the rest of the year seem do everything possible to ensure that fish and wildlife has less money from hunters, and is under the thumb of these groups instead of following ecological principals for game management. This Op Ed talks about hunters paying a portion of the amount of the "needed" increase and the rest coming from taxes, but I can't see why hunters would want to pay anything more in Washington under the current situation...other than what they have to pay through increasing Washington State taxes.
Having been a resident of several western states, Washington seems to have one of the poorest values for hunting licenses of any state that I have lived in, and from my view outside the internal workings of the Fish & Wildlife Dept as a customer, one of the poorest ran departments. Hawaii may be more poorly run from my interactions, and California might be a worse value, but I am not so sure about that. Washington Fish & Wildlife doesn't want to be anything like Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, or even Oregon (at least from my experience communicating with them), who all seem to value hunters (the main paying group) at least somewhat as an important special interest group in the wildlife management process.
ARTICLE
Lawmakers, stop underfunding Fish and Wildlife, the agency that protects our lands and water
Now is the time to invest in conservation and outdoor opportunity, not continue to shortchange the legacy we hold in trust for future generations.
By Rachel Voss, Mitch Friedman and Butch Smith
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is like a wild goose that lays golden eggs. Yet Washingtonians — especially legislators in Olympia — are taking it for granted. We need lawmakers to fully fund the department to fulfill its mission for the Evergreen State’s outdoor enthusiasts and natural heritage.
Doing so yields dividends for state and local economies. While the Legislature has been allocating less than $50 million in tax money annually to WDFW, more than $170 million comes back to Olympia each year from sales taxes on purchases made to enjoy fish and wildlife. What’s more, Washingtonians spend hundreds of millions of dollars fishing, hunting and wildlife watching, often in small towns from Ilwaco to Chewelah — places that really need these dollars and jobs.
Yet, as made plain from headlines about orcas to the grim talk around our campfires, Washington’s wildlife are at risk. Underfunding of WDFW since the Great Recession hinders the ability to respond. All told, these natural resources comprise under one percent of the state’s overall budget.
It’s astounding that we expect WDFW to manage and let us enjoy everything from salmon and elk to wolves and waterfowl for what amounts to a rounding error for the state.
In 2017, the department alerted the legislature to its $15 million per year funding gap. Legislators were skeptical, demanding an audit and oversight. WDFW assembled a Budget and Policy Advisory Group with more than 20 diverse stakeholders, including the three of us. An independent audit showed that the department compared well with other state agencies and found no significant fat to trim.
After reviewing the audit, we’ve taken aim at the real problem of underfunding, which has exacerbated fish and wildlife declines, generating understandable frustration. While we’re used to competing over things like salmon allocations or wolf management, we all depend on WDFW being successful.
This year we’ve asked the Legislature to increase WDFW’s two-year budget by $60 million. A quarter of that would come from modest fishing and hunting license increases, the rest from the state.
The fact is, we ask a lot of our Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Washington’s growing population puts unrelenting pressure on our land and waters. From resident orcas to spring Chinook, we’re seeing biodiversity and habitat lost faster than they can be recovered. Hikers and bikers are looking to state wildlife areas as trailheads get increasingly crowded. Hunters and anglers, who provide conservation funding through licenses and special taxes on their equipment, are wondering whether their children and grandchildren can continue cherished outdoor traditions.
All of us are demanding healthy ecosystems and abundant fish and wildlife. But if we want the department to hold back the tide, we need to give the agency a bigger bucket.
If you take your kids to jig for squid on the Seattle waterfront, bird watch on the Skagit Delta or photograph mountain goats in the Cascades, the Department of Fish and Wildlife is your agency. If you fly fish for steelhead, troll for salmon or roam the ridges hunting deer, this is your agency. If you want to hear the howl of wolves, and know that officers are protecting them from poachers, this is your agency.
Fish and wildlife are vital to Washington’s quality of life. Now is the time to invest in conservation and outdoor opportunity, not continue to shortchange the legacy we hold in trust for future generations.
