[Snowbrushy]

This article makes me question DNR's principles. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/254868_munguia07.html

[greg]

Long sleazy tradition in government, fed and state, IMO. I'll bet that WFPA salary is way fatter than what the DNR paid.

[Allison]

That's sickening.

[lookout bob]

(the DNR has principles???????? )

[yew]

The rotating door between government and industry or government and activist interest group is nothing new, particularly at the federal level at Washington DC. In the 1990s, the Clinton administration hired many environmental group political activists for jobs in departments of Interior, Agriculture, EPA,etc . When Bush won the election in 2000, they were fired and many returned to jobs at DC-based activist groups. I don't know if it was "sleazy" for Clinton to hire those people. They did have an intimate knowledge of the issues they'd be working on. It'd be unfair to say it's ethical for environmentalists to pass through the government-to-private revolving door (because I may like them) but unethical for industry (because I don't like them). The WFPA job will probably pay more since some state jobs don't pay all that much. It'd be reasonable to quit a lower paying job for a higher paying job. Many people do that. I don't interpret that article as pointing a particular finger at DNR or DNR practices or policies.

[yew]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/261176_ethics01.html is a March 1st article on the DNR to timber industry lobbyist job switch. I have no full opinion on this situation since it's a formal legal issue. Whether this individual is guilty of ethics violations is for a judge or committe of professional ethics thinkers to decide. However, the Sierra Club's lawyer is probably wrong about what this person's job description was when she worked for the state. I very much doubt her job with DNR was to only be biased towards endangered species. ("When she was working for the state, she was supposed to be making sure the public's interest in endangered species was being protected."). I bet her job was to coordinate completion of a HCP for private timberlands, to allow timber production on private land that is zoned for such use, while still at the same time providing enough habitat for species of concern, thereby abiding by the Endangered Species Act. In other words, he job was probably to help develop a plan so that keeps logs coming out of the woods but does not violate the ESA and then cause an abrupt shutdown. A more general blabber: The lowlands around Puget Sound used to be an ecological paradise with bountiful salmon, steelhead, elk, wolves, bears, spotted owls and marbled murrelets, slugs, snails, rare lichens and fungi, salamanders, frogs and many other organisms. Those areas are now covered with houses, highways, parking lots, buildings, etc. and are wealthy and prosperous because of all that development. Out of fairness and shared responsibility towards the Earth, I wish all the towns and cities around the Puget Sound would have to write and implement Habitat Conservation Plans for spotted owls, marbled murrelets, and endangered stocks of salmon and steelhead and other species of concern. They should not be allowed to move one shovel of dirt unless they can recreate enough habitat to maintain viable populations for the species above. It's not fair to single out and pick on private timberland to provide habitat. Poor rural towns surrounded by large tracts of forest should not have to bear the brunt of economic sacrifice that comes with habitat preservation. Urban areas ought to lose jobs, wealth and prosperity to protect habitat too and should not push all the sacrifice on to poor rural parts of the state.

[yew]

The 03/02/06 New York Times has a good article on the revolving door between industry and government regulators at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/03/national/03water.html?hp&ex=1141448400&en=49e5944dc5ecbad0&ei=5094&partner=homepage "For Thirsty Farmers, Old Friends at Interior Dept" . This ex-DNR employee situation is nothing compared to what goes on in DC on a regular basis. One guy in this article was still receiving industry paychecks while he was working for the federal government! You can register for free at http://www.nytimes.com to read the article.