 |
Emergency/Incident
Hotline
1-877-933-9847
|
For more information
please contact
WDFW Enforcement Program.
360-902-2936
enforcement-web@dfw.wa.gov
|
Headquarters
Natural Resources Building
1111 Washington St.
Olympia, Washington 98501
(360) 902-2936
enforcement-web@dfw.wa.gov
Administration
Chief Bruce Bjork,
Assistant Director |
Deputy Chief Bill Jarmon,
Field Operations |
Statewide
Investigative Unit
Lieutenant Ed Volz
(425) 379-2320
Office Staff
Bobbi Monk,
Administrative Assistant |
Jera Fazekas,
Secretary Administrative |
Customer Service Staff
| Jennifer Babcock-Holman
|
| Sheri Davis |
| Tina Hamilton |
| Jeff Skeens |
Training / Recruitment
Lieutenant Rich Mann
(360) 902-2923
Accreditation
/ Budget
Kimberly Flowers
(360) 902-2835
Problem Wildlife / Deleterious/Exotic
Wildlife
Sean Carrell
(360) 902-2926
Logistics/Emergency
Management
Lieutenant Dennis Nicks
(360) 902-2928
Aviation Division
Jim Hodgson
(360) 753-4717
Vessel Fleet
Manager
Lieutenant Dan O'Hagan
(360) 268-0623
Olympia Boat Shop
Gary Willis
(360) 753-4717
Radio Communications
Coordinator
Lieutenant John McIntosh
(360) 902-2346
Regional
Enforcement Offices
REGION 1
Eastern Washington
Captain Mike Whorton
(509) 892-1001
(Pend Oreille, Stevens, Ferry, Lincoln, Spokane, Whitman,
Asotin, Garfield, Columbia, and Walla Walla Counties)
REGION 2
North Central Washington
Captain Chris Anderson
(509) 754-4624
(Okanogan, Chelan, Douglas, Grant, and Adams Counties)
REGION 3
South Central Washington
Captain Chuck Kohls
(509) 575-2740
(Kittitas, Yakima, Franklin, and Benton Counties)
REGION 4
North Puget Sound
Captain Bill Hebner
(425) 775-1311
(Whatcom, Skagit, Snohomish, and King Counties)
REGION 5
Southwest Washington
Captain Murray Schlenker
(360) 696-6211
(Lewis, Cowlitz, Clark, Skamania, and Klickitat Counties)
REGION 6
Coastal Washington
Captain Dan Brinson
(360) 586-6129 or
(360) 249-4628
(Clallam, Jefferson,
Grays Harbor, Kitsap, Mason, Pacific, Pierce, Thurston, and Wahkiakum
Counties)
STATEWIDE MARINE DIVISION
Captain Mike Cenci
(360) 586-6129 or
(360) 249-4628
(Ocean, North Sound, South Sound, and Strait of
Juan de Fuca)
|
|
| 2007 Washington State Department of
Fish
and
Wildlife (WDFW)
Enforcement Program
Customer
Satisfaction Survey
Executive
Summary Enforcement Program Citizen Survey Methodology
In August 2006, the Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Enforcement Program began to devise
a citizen survey to meet the requirements of a Commission
on
Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA) standard. The standard requires
that agencies seeking accreditation must conduct a citizen survey at least once
every three years. The survey must include the following
measures: overall agency
performance, overall competency of agency employees, citizens’ perceptions of officers’ attitudes
and behavior, community concern over safety and security, and recommendations
or suggestions for improvement.
To meet the requirements of this standard,
Accreditation Manager Kimberly Flowers sought the assistance
of the one accredited natural resource law enforcement agency
in
the nation: the Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife. Major Bayard Holleger,
Jr.,
provided a sample of their Enforcement Section’s citizen survey that served as
a
preliminary template for the WDFW Enforcement Program survey.
The initial draft of the survey was reviewed and approved by Chief Bruce Bjork, the
Enforcement Accreditation Committee, Enforcement Captains, Public Affairs Special
Assistant Margaret Ainscough, Strategic Planning Special Assistant Sue Patnude, and
Washington State University Associate Director of the Division of Governmental Studies
and Services Michael J. Gaffney.
Information Technology Specialist Doug Hoyer adapted the survey to an Internet-based
form for posting on the WDFW Enforcement Web page. The survey was developed for
on-line completion because it is the most cost-effective survey method; we hoped to
reach a large, statewide audience; and the data is collected in a manner that facilitates
tabulation and analysis.
The on-line survey became active on May 24, 2007, and it was available for completion
until December 31, 2007. During that time, we received 2673 responses. Persons
interested in completing the survey on paper were mailed a copy at their request.
Management Analyst Jonathan Neville compiled the results data and created the charts
and final reports using Microsoft Office products. The results of this survey will become
a baseline for future surveys.
Major Findings
- Demographics. Most respondents recreate by fishing, hunting, visiting wildlife, or
harvesting shellfish. The respondents recreating are primarily made up of 40 to 70
year old residents of Washington State who have lived in WA for at least twenty
years and have hunted and fished for over ten years. The top five counties most
frequented are King, Snohomish, Pierce, Grays Harbor, and Cowlitz counties.
- Contact Information. Out of 2673 respondents, 62% had recent contact with
Enforcement Program staff. Overall, 85% of the respondents viewed their contact
with WDFW employees between Neutral to Very Pleasant. Officers made up the
majority of contacts at 77%, compared to 15% Hunter Education staff, and 8% being
Customer Service employees. Assisting citizens made up 23% of Officer contacts,
while only 5% of contacts resulted in citations.
- Personal Contact Evaluation. In regards to Officer knowledge and job
competence, as well as attitude, 70% of the respondents gave ratings of Good or
Excellent. In regards to demeanor, Officers received a 68% rating of Good or
Excellent. Appearance resulted in 78% respondents giving officers a Good or
Excellent review.
- Officer Staffing Levels. While recreating in Washington, 10% of respondents
witnessed Officers on patrol Often or Always. In contrast, 27% of participants
witnessed violations Often or Always. Moreover, 65% of survey respondents would
like to see more Officers on patrol and believe that more officers are most needed in
Western Washington, followed by Eastern Washington. Enforcing Recreational
Fisheries, Hunting/Trapping, Commercial Fisheries Rules and Laws as well as
conducting Public Education and Responding to Dangerous Wildlife Complaints
have been shown to be the most important priorities of the Enforcement Program.
Overall, 64% of the respondents believe that there needs to be more Officer
presence statewide and 58% more presence in their most frequently visited county.
- Overall Evaluation. Only 22% of the respondents believe that the Enforcement
Program is at least doing a Good job of protecting wildlife resources while 33% of
the respondents believe that the program is doing a Poor or Very Poor job. In
regards to protecting fish/shellfish resources, the Enforcement Program had 12%
rating of Good or better and a 37% rating of doing a Poor job or worse. For
protecting public safety, 30% believed that the Enforcement Program is doing a
Good or better job while 24% think the Program is doing a Poor or Very Poor job.
Lastly, 32% of the respondents believe that the Enforcement Program is doing a
Good or Excellent job as a law-enforcement agency, while 24% believed that the
agency is doing a Poor or Very Poor job.
|
|
