WDFW has a new director

Here ya go, just posted on the WDFW web site


http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/jun1618a

we'll see, thank god it wasn't RW.

Does anyone know who the other 7 candidates were, that got cut down to the final 3…….and who were the other two???? Guess I'd like to know how many WDFW people were in the running????? Were there any women in the 7 candidates?????

Yeah, once again they continue with their "covert" operational model. I guess it really only matters what the new guy is all about. Anybody know him?

Joe Stohr, Heather Bartlett, Ron Warren, Jim Davis, Jennifer Quan, Kelly Susewind, and Marc Miller (ex-Illinois Director and currently working for Michigan DNR).

Worked with Kelly Susewind for years. He is a smart and reasonable guy. An engineer. Don't know if he has any fish science background. He grew up in Grays Harbor County, and is politically moderate. I think it would be good if one of us had a talk with him about hatcheries, nets, and open process while he's still fresh.

I heard the final three were Susewind, Stohr and Quan.
I think it’s interesting they called the decision “unanimous”. Was it really unanimous or did they pick someone then have everyone agree that it was unanimous.

Bushbear and Jigornot, thanks for your input.

There are many sportspeople that are happy that the Commission went the way it did...Kelly will have to get "up to speed" on the WDFW bear problem, the wolf problem, commercial vs. sports problem, and the every 2 year budget......culvert and the McCleary case will "burn up" lots of State dollars, and at this time the out go on funds exceeds the ability to collect enough monies to keep everyone happy.....person changes but the problems go on....

This description of Mr. Susewind sounds like he is well grounded. What would you suggest as a means to engage him? E-mail, phone, face-to-face, fishing trip?

On important matters it is not at all uncommon for boards to vote, and then once they have a decision, to re-vote and make it unanimous.

Fish on...

Todd

Kelly is a genuinely good person and is pragmatic in his approach to all issues. He has a scientific background but I believe his background in fisheries science is moderate at best. I expect good things but often it's the team around the director that is most important given that they are the ones providing advice.

Large Edward

He doesn't start until August 1. He'll be transitioning out of his current job at Ecology. I would suggest folks be cautious in over-loading him with contacts.

His learning curve will be steep. Upper and mid-level managers will be driving his decision making. He'll be as good as the information he gets. As Director, he has both the need to know and the right to know what has happening in the past and what is projected to happen in the future. I hope he will be asking tough questions and deserves full answers.

Bushbear, your comments make complete sense to me. I'd be happy to take him on a trip to summer run fish on the Cowlitz. He could see for himself what this once great fishery has become.

If Kelly never fished the Cowlitz "in the day" then a trip now where he gets a fish or two, strike or two might be a good day. I fished the Colwitz some in the 70s, always from the bank. A zoo. Caught a few rather small trout. Were I to go today and get an adult salmon or steelhead then it would be better to me.

True, in that scenario he would have no prior personal experience (the good old days) upon which to assess today's experience. Too bad.

And while the Cowlitz was somewhat of a zoo in the early 70s one could still run a drift boat and compete with the 16 foot sleds and even I could catch a fish or two.

Where does that leave me, who couldn't catch any?? Must add that I have done a couple charters out of Westport in the mid 70s and returned with nothing. So, a trip today would probably be "better".

Thought on the new Director. In my experience working with Ecology, one thing that they were was process oriented. When they proposed a rule there hearings on top of hearings, stakeholder meetings. There was no excuse outside of pure laziness for somebody who had an interest not to know what was going on and why. Many of these processes included the tribes.

It will be interesting to see how Kelly deals with not only the Tribes but his "own" staff telling him how the process "works".

Wow, you must have been "snake bit" in the mid 70's....THOSE WERE THE DAYS OF BIG CHARTER FLEETS, 275 boats, some days some of the charter boats did a "double run". Westport was so packed with cars, people....that it was almost impossible to move. Derbies were common place, lots of big chinook and thousands of coho/silvers.


Grays Harbor had lots of large employment companies, running 24/7, fun times, many businesses...…….NOW not so much!!!!!

I know all that. Everybody else caught fish.

One of my jobs was developing in-season updates for salmon runs in Puget Sound. One of my bosses was an avid but unlucky angler. He went up to Neah Bay once and shut down the whole area for 3 days. While he was there nobody caught anything. Anyway, we finally figured out that each coho he caught represented 250,000 fish in the run size. Caught 2 at Buoy Zooey once; half a million returned.. I was just worse than that.

I would love to be a fly on the wall when Ron Warren and Mike Grossman let him know that for all practical purposes, any decisions he might be thinking about making will have to be run past the NWIFC for approval, and that he actually works for the Tribes, not the stakeholders who purchase the licenses. Different Director, same cronies running the show.

That would be a very interesting conversation. "This is how the world is".

Maybe a simple organizational chart on his wall would be a good start........showing that he reports to and takes direction from the Commission in his new job. Seems that is where former Director Unsworth fell on his sword.

That would require the Commission to give clear direction with consequences for non-compliance.

If the new Director is unaware of how/why the position became vacant we are doomed because (1) the Commission didn't make it clear during interviews and/or (2) as a resident of the State and as a State employee he would have had to be living under a rock to not have been aware.