January 2002
Contact: Josh Weiss,
Legislative and Legal Affairs Coordinator
(360) 902-2226

Situation

Current state law defines Fish and Wildlife Officers as employees of a limited-authority Washington law enforcement agency. In 1985, the Legislature authorized Fish and Wildlife Officers to enforce all criminal laws of the state. The change was made in part to provide fully-commissioned officers in remote parts of the state where other law enforcement agencies usually do not patrol or have limited resources. However, because the 1985 statute did not provide arrest authority for non-criminal infractions, and does not allow for Fish and Wildlife Officers to enforce the exceptions to RCW 10.31.100, Arrest Without Warrant, the enforcement authority of the officers has been unduly constrained. Fish and Wildlife Officers, like state troopers, operate across local jurisdictional boundaries. Although they have a primary are of responsibility for enforcing fish and wildlife laws, they are frequently required to act independently or are called upon to assist other law enforcement agencies in the enforcement of general criminal laws.

Problem

The ambiguity of current state laws creates a potential for civil litigation against Fish and Wildlife Officers, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the state in situations where the officers respond to offenses other than fish and wildlife violations. Tort claims have been filed and settled because of the ambiguity of current state law (RCW 77.12.075) concerning enforcement authority of Fish and Wildlife officers.

Proposal

Amending the current law would authorize Fish and Wildlife Officers to enforce misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offices under RCW 10.31.100 (arrest without a warrant).This would allow the Fish and Wildlife Officers to arrest without violations occurring in their presence but with probable cause in the case of reckless and under the influence vessel operation; illegally possessed firearms on school premises; serious traffic offenses; criminal trespass involving hunters, harvesters and landowner conflicts; theft of forest products on private land, and vandalism without receiving special deputy status or calling for assistance from sheriff's deputies or Washington State Patrol troopers. This change also would reduce workload for other law enforcement agencies when Fish and Wildlife Officers are present, trained and able to deal with the violation.

Designating WDFW as a "general authority Washington law enforcement agency" would clarify the jurisdiction and authority of Fish and Wildlife officers. The state Attorney General's Office and county prosecutors recommend the change to reduce the potential for civil litigation against WDFW and the state. The Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) Legislative Committee unanimously supports the proposed amendment.

Other supporters of this measure include:

Organizations
Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys
Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs
Washington State Patrol
Washington State Council of Police and Sheriffs
Criminal Justice Training Commission
Washington Association of Sheriffs
Washington State Council of Fire Fighters
Washington Federation of State Employees
Washington Wildlife Federation

Individuals
Larry Erickson, Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs
Chief Ronal Serpas, Washington State Patrol
Sheriff Gary Edwards, Thurston County
Sheriff Bill Wiester, Grant County
Sheriff Mark Sterk, Spokane County
Sheriff Rick Bart, Snohomish County
Sheriff David Reichert, King County
Sheriff Larry Taylor, Benton County

Return to Legislature 2002