DFG renamed

[Clark]

I think I can provide some background that might be helpful for those interested in this issue.

The name change comes from recently-signed legislation that was the culmination of a year-long effort by a large group of stakeholders, DFG, the Natural Resources Agency, and members of the public. This effort was put in motion by a bill, AB 2376 (Huffman, 2010), that required the Natural Resources Agency to develop a strategic vision for the department. California Fly Fisher did a story on it last summer when the project was just ramping up.

The following link is to the homepage of the project. If you want, you can spend hours watching/listening to meetings, reading reports, background information and public comments. It's all there.

http://www.vision.ca.gov/

The volunteer stakeholder group that did an immense amount of work on the project was made up of 52 people that represented interest groups including fishing and hunting, water and agriculture interests, local and state government, science, aquaculture, business, forestry, non-consumptive users, Native American tribes, landowners, marine resources, and game wardens. This group included representatives from Cal Trout, Trout Unlimited, Ducks Unlimited, California Waterfowl Association, California Outdoor Heritage Alliance, The Sportfishing Conservancy, and the California Game Warden’s Association, to name a few. And yes, the group also had representatives from the Humane Society, Audubon California, and The Defenders of Wildlife. But to say these groups were or will be running the department is simply not true.

After this process was completed, the state Legislature took the recommendations from the strategic vision and drafted bills. Most of the language in the bills was directly tied to recommendations from the group, others were not. As far as the name change goes, the stakeholder group could not come to agreement on whether the name should be changed or not. In the end, it found its way into the bill anyway.

The legislation specifically says that the department is not required to update or change logos, signs, badges, or anything else until those items would normally be replaced. The major immediate expense would come from a website overhaul and other similar expenses.

The bills may change the name of the department, but they also do the following:

Streamline permitting processes, improve the department’s use of independent science, create an environmental crimes task force to facilitate prosecution of wildlife crimes, encourage intergovernmental coordination, nonprofit partnerships and use of credible science, extend benefits to fish and game wardens, allow for adjustment of fees for cost recovery, study the feasibility of upgrading the department’s electronic systems to track fish and game code violations, re-assign several hunting and fishing and other regulatory provisions from the Legislature to the Fish and Game Commission, authorizes the department to recoup its program and implementation costs from many fee-based programs, strengthens the wild and heritage trout program while improving the scientific management of trout hatcheries and appropriating $1 million for hatchery improvements.

These changes are in addition to many others that the department has already started putting in place such as creating a Science Institute within DFG to showcase and increase the good work the fish and game biologists and scientists do, and a related DFG "Climate College."

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/Science/

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/Climate_and_En...imate_College/

As you can see, the name change is just one aspect of the strategic vision legislation. Lots of the other pieces will be very helpful for the department moving forward. The one that I particularly like is the requirement that the department put more emphasis on its wild and heritage trout program.

The new DFG director is a life-long fly fisherman and was most recently the California director of Trout Unlimited. He is very passionate about the state’s fish and wildlife and is extremely driven to make a difference at the department.

So, before we get too far ahead of ourselves and jump to conclusions about where the department is going because of a name change, I say we give them time to implement these changes. In the end, we just may end up with more well-rounded and effective fish and wildlife management agency here in California.

[aaron]

Knowledge bomb! Good stuff Clark, thanks!

[David Lee]

A sad and tragic situation .

D.~