Do you participate? - WDFW/ODFW

Do you participate in trying to shape the future of WDFW/ODFW policy?

  • Yes

    Votes: 31 68.9%

  • No

    Votes: 6 13.3%

  • Waste of time

    Votes: 7 15.6%

  • Other

    Votes: 1 2.2%
  • Total voters
    45
Shawn Seeger

Shawn Seeger

Legend
Forum Supporter
This morning, as in several of the last couple weeks, I was submitting input to the WDFW and a couple of state representatives.

Not tooting my horn, but I have been active in organizations, clubs, and politics since I was a younger man, a volunteer trait from my Dad.

So, when WDFW/ODFW asks for citizen input, do you email, provide written testimony or attend meetings, and provide verbal testimony?

So, my poll question is, "Do you participate in trying to shape the future of WDFW/ODFW policy?"

I am just curious... thanks
 
I do. I mainly make fishing rule and seasons suggests. Have given some input at public meetings in the past.
I’m not sure how much it helps or how much they actually listen or appreciate the input, but I put my $0.02 in.
SF
 
Buzzy said:
I'm curious how you submit input to WDFW. I just looked at their "preposals" and "pending rule making" and am not quite sure how to submit a proposal (I guess email their coordinator - Rules.Coordinator@dfw.wa.gov ).

I recall WDFW used to notify folks who were signed up for their emails when "proposals" should be submitted. I thought that was a good program from them and remember using it several times.
Click to expand...
Yes, anyone can sign up for emails regarding the things they want to be notified about, hunting, fishing, wolves etc. Then you get an email and generally there is a link to submit comments.

And I would guess that link you shared would work.

You can also email the Commissioner
 
Yes, but not a lot. And hardly at all since the Covid shutdown. I was becoming somewhat of a regular at Commission meetings until then. It felt like there was a shot at influencing outcomes, but it doesn't feel as useful as it used to. Perhaps that's because I'm wanting them to consider larger changes than they are able or willing to consider. It feels like they're playing mid 20th century fisheries while the 21st century leaves them in the dust.
 
I used to be involved with ODFW as a volunteer. Over many years I taught hunter education classes to about 800 kids and adults, and for years was half of the Master Hunter instructor tag team at ODFW headquarters. One of their bios frequented our hunting camps. My observations while working with the agency taught me that if you are not an owner of very large land parcels, or wealthy owner of a successful commercial fishing-connected business, or influential politician, you are voiceless. I believe that hearings were held and public testimony accepted because the ORS or Administrative Rules dictated such would be done, but the “preferred alternatives” were preordained. In my lifetime I have seen the agency move from a fish and game management and advocacy focus to become mostly a marketer of “opportunity“ to fish and hunt. I feel sorry for the dozens of dedicated staff who are powerless to do anything except follow the dictates from the executive corner.
 
Last edited:
After my six year experience with the Skagit trying to claw back a few months of opportunity I discovered a lot of things. If you want to be anything more than a data point on a bar graph of department supplied multiple choices then you are going to need to dress up and show up...over and over. And if what you want is going to require funding, (and what doesn't?) then it doesn't hurt to have a sit down with your state representative.

As with most bureaucratic endeavors things move at a snails pace. Partly due to the biennial budgeting. It practically guarantees a wait for any action to begin for at least 3 years. If it involves anadromous fish then NGOs and tribes get involved and reviews and permissions need taken care of.

Change can be effected. I just don't have the stamina for it anymore.
 
It depends. Is what they're discussing - proposing somthing I have (perhaps exclusive) knowledge about from personal experience - observation over a substantial period of time? Then Yes. I'll send emails and make phone calls to a program manager and/or the district bio to give input and find out what else I need to do.
I've been able to get two drainages with barriers to anadromous fish passage opened back up for trout fishing after ESA regulation deadlines shut them down before they could be properly evaluated.
 
_WW_ said:
After my six year experience with the Skagit trying to claw back a few months of opportunity I discovered a lot of things. If you want to be anything more than a data point on a bar graph of department supplied multiple choices then you are going to need to dress up and show up...over and over. And if what you want is going to require funding, (and what doesn't?) then it doesn't hurt to have a sit down with your state representative.

As with most bureaucratic endeavors things move at a snails pace. Partly due to the biennial budgeting. It practically guarantees a wait for any action to begin for at least 3 years. If it involves anadromous fish then NGOs and tribes get involved and reviews and permissions need taken care of.

Change can be effected. I just don't have the stamina for it anymore.
Click to expand...

In my case, if only my representative would take my call or agree to meet with me after multiple attempts. Instead I got a mouthpiece boy Friday aid who was worthless. Whether my requests were ever actually forwarded, I’m not sure but all I heard back was crickets. This was in 2016 when NOF negotiations were stalled.
I also sent emails to other representatives and only received one canned reply back. Should I do this again, I’ll make myself much more noticeable in regards to the lack of response.
SF
 
I've continued to participate since my first experience in Olympia testifying before the Commission in support of mandatory wild Steelhead release statewide back in 2000. I have low expectations that my participation actually moves the needle but will continue because the alternative is to give up and become another bitter angler posting toxic content on social media. ;) As a hardcore Steelheader approaching retirement who's seen many of my favorite rivers either diminished or closed to angling in the last 23 years NOT being bitter is a tough one.
 
Billy said:
I need to participate more but it's easier to just bitch😁
Click to expand...
After Shawn started this thread I paused and thought about when I used to write, email and phone the legislative hot line (did it ever "move the needle" as doublespey says, maybe, maybe not). But certainly NOT if we don't try. Last night I decided it was time to try again so I wrote DFW's commission (commission@dfw.wa.gov) and to the rules coordinator (Rules.Coordinator@dfw.wa.gov) regarding a change I'd like to see made, a simple rule change. It should be easy. Will I hear from them? Maybe. Maybe not.

This thread reminds me of the great line in The Shawshank Redemption "From now on I'll write two letters a week".
 
If I'm being honest...no. I got involved in TU when I lived in Monroe in the 90s. We were a brand new chapter, but several members had some good history working with WDFW and USFW. I clipped a lot of damn fish a few times, planted some trees in a slough, and a few other projects. As a natural result, got closer to WDFW resources and got sent a few surveys.

I also hunted birds pretty hard during that time. I honestly had better feedback from that side of it than the fish guys. In fact, the feedback I saw from the fish side was pretty poor. It felt like they were glad to have us doing some work, but didn't want to give us any info. Which was pretty much opposite the hunting guys. Just being honest.

Then I moved away and became busy with kids and sports and all that. Still fished & hunted, but not near as much. And no time to volunteer with TU or DU. About 2014 or so I started fishing a lot again and just haven't had the energy or the desire to get involved, specifically with WDFW.

A friend of mine is a young man just starting his career. He is involved in the science side of it at WDFW. He is doing amazing work. Things like proving to his superiors that there are brook trout in mainstem S rivers...on his own time. Doing all sorts of salmon DNA tracing. I see the resistance he is met with and just shake my head.
The enforcement issue is big for me too. Kills me that I never see any enforcement.

Having said all that...one of my 2024 goals is to write my state reps and senators more letters. I will try to influence WDFW from outside their organization. I'm generally an optimist btw.

Hats off to all those that work with them and for them. I know it's not always easy and I applaud & appreciate your efforts.

Good poll Shawn. Even if it's not all good news.
 
From a CA DFW employee point of view: we listened and responded to input from bird hunters and any folks that used DFW lands. In some cases, it did move the needle on regulations. As @skyriver says - the fish folk seemed to not be as responsive.

I've always been active with letter writing, less so with in person testimony. My new crusade will be to try to convince ODFW to open Oregon coast tidewater to year around trout fishing. I don't really understand the rationale of closing coastal rivers/estuaries between October 31 and May 21. If it's to protect smolts, the estuaries are usually full of them during the summer months. I just want the opportunity to fish for estuary residing coastal cutthroat.
 
At one time, me and our flyfishing club were very active in making regulation changes to some fisheries. We were able to change the regs to wild trout C&R for a specific section of the Willamette River regardless that we were told we wouldn't be successful.

But that was back in the days the Internet was first becoming popular and we used it to unite clubs around Oregon to support our change in the regulations. The ODF&W didn't see that coming.

However, a few years later we tried to change the regs for Davis Lake to C&R only for trout considering it is a flyfishing only fishery and had been invaded by illegally introduced LMB. But this time, they opted for a "slot limit" instead of a strict C&R. A slot limit has never shown to help a fishery in the least because the trout must survive past a specific size so it isn't much better than catch and kill.

After that one, I hung up my hat for doing battle with the ODF&W.
 
Nice thread & a good reminder. I have but have not in some time. For me, it's mostly emails, signing this or that. But admittedly I've fallen behind a bit.
 
Since retiring in 2005 I have spend a lot of time till various windmills and actual managed to spear a few of the mill's vanes. I continue with my chasing of windmills and their vanes in the hope that lighting may once again strike, and some positive change will occur.

Curt
 
Smalma said:
Since retiring in 2005 I have spend a lot of time till various windmills and actual managed to spear a few of the mill's vanes. I continue with my chasing of windmills and their vanes in the hope that lighting may once again strike, and some positive change will occur.

Curt
Click to expand...
Curt, you and Steve were amoung the leaders of an outstanding example of when a group of anglers band together and initiate some positive change in fisheries management. Every time Facebook reminds me of our OccupySkagit protests at Howard Miller I smile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top