Here is some additional information about the WDFW - DNR merger.
I don't have a bill number yet. This might be in the main appropriations bill. You can see a detailed 42-page explanation (pdf format) of the Senate's budget proposal here:
http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/Budget/Detail/2010/sooverview0223.pdfThe big picture looks something like this. The Legislature is required to balance the budget; unlike the federal government, our state government can't run a deficit. The Legislature is faced with a revenue shortfall for the next two years of about $2.8 billion. Here's how they plan to deal with it:
Tax increases: $918,000,000
Spending cuts: $838,000,000
Federal assistance: $583,000,000
State emergency reserves: $498,000,000
This is what the Senate document says about the merger:
"CONSOLIDATION, RESTRUCTURING AND GENERAL EFFICIENCIES - $11.1 MILLION
GENERAL FUND-STATE SAVINGS; $1.6 MILLION OTHER FUND SAVINGS
"Savings are achieved via the following: consolidating the Department of Natural
Resources, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the State Parks and Recreation
Commission; consolidating the back-office functions of the Puget Sound Partnership and
the Recreation and Conservation Office; modifying the structure of the Growth
Management Hearings Board (Board) and consolidating the Board and the Environmental
Hearings Office into the Environmental and Land Use Hearings Office; reducing the
general fund subsidization of fee-based programs; requiring small agencies to consolidate
their back-office functions within Small Agency Client Services; and other administrative
reductions."
This explanation doesn't tell us exactly how much combining WDFW, DNR, and State Parks and Recreation would save. It's probably most of the $12.7 million. But even using that figure, $12,700,000 is only 1.5% of the total of $838,000,000 in spending cuts and an even smaller percentage -- 44/100ths of one percent -- of the total shortfall. Given the potential impact on fish and wildlife management, that seems like giving up a lot for a paltry financial gain. But one of the Senate's stated principles is that all agencies and programs must bear some of the sacrifices, so it's difficult to argue that any agency should be exempt. This looks like a juggernaut, and it's probably impossible to persuade the Legislature to spend several million dollars to keep WDFW independent -- unless we show them how to replace that money from somewhere else. Therefore, I suggest asking your elected representatives to take an equal amount out of WDFW's General Fund allocation and make it up with fee increases for fishing and hunting licenses. In other words, give sportsmen and sportswomen the opportunity to reach into their own pockets to keep WDFW independent as the voters envisioned when they passed the initiative creating WDFW's present organizational structure. I think it's the only chance. We're talking roughly $10 million, and we license buyers can absorb that -- it amounts to a few bucks per license. An annual fishing license will still cost less than a tank of gas to and from the lake.