collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions  (Read 2465 times)

Offline Bob33

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 21190
  • Groups: SCI, RMEF, NRA, Hunter Education
Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions
« on: February 06, 2016, 07:37:28 AM »
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has invested, politically and financially, in its Wolf Advisory Group.

Washington state wildlife managers have committed nearly $1 million in the past year to tame the passions humans have about wolves.

The investment reflects the Department of Fish and Wildlife’s position that when it comes to wolves, humans are the biggest challenge.

Most of the money has been spent on a “third-party neutral,” Francine Madden, whose conciliatory counseling services cost the state up to $8,000 a day.

For nearly a year, Madden has led meetings of WDFW’s Wolf Advisory Group, a panel without policy-setting authority that will make recommendations to state managers. The group represents ranchers, hunters, conservationists and animal-rights activists. Besides hiring Madden, WDFW in the past year nearly doubled the WAG’s membership from nine to 17.

The department’s managers are betting that this panel can set aside the acrimony of the past and reach a consensus on how wolves should be managed in Washington.

That was always WDFW’s hope, but meetings of the old WAG were “destructive,” said Donny Martorello, WDFW’s point man on wolf recovery. Members dug in and weren’t moving toward a consensus, he said.

So WDFW brought in Madden, who is based in Washington, D.C. As wolf wars in the West continue and lawsuits fly, the new WAG meetings are swaddled in phrases such as “path to peace,” “capacity building” and, above all, “conflict transformation.”

“What is conflict transformation?” Madden asks. “Conflict transformation is essentially peace-building embedded in social justice.”

The terminology can be a bit squishy. But underneath are hard questions.

What are ranchers expected to do to protect their animals from wolves? When will environmentalists accept lethal removal — shooting wolves that prey on livestock?

And will people not on the WAG be at peace with what the panel advises?

So far, the jury is still out.

Former WAG member Dave Dashiell, a Stevens County rancher, said he doubts the effort will succeed.

He was a pivotal figure on the panel, a link to northeastern Washington, where most of the state’s wolves live. Wolves threaten his livelihood, yet he was initially willing to talk about reconciling wolf recovery with ranching.

But he said he left the panel in part because he lost confidence that other interests will ever accept lethal removal as a legitimate tool to control wolves.

“I think Francine is doing her best, but I think it’s an impossible task when you come down to brass tacks,” he said.

Don Dashiell, a Stevens County commissioner and Dave Dashiell’s brother, remains on the advisory group.


Progress reported


The WAG meets every few months around the state. The meetings often straddle two days. WDFW pays for lodging and meals, including “non-working dinners” at which members learn about each other without discussing wolf policies. The idea is that environmentalists will learn what motivates and worries ranchers, and vice versa.

The meetings eschew the standard approach to policy-making: List an issue, discuss it and vote.

Madden said she focuses on relationships and processes, not the substance of an issue. Meetings have agenda items such as “Exploring the spectrum of human needs with respect to wolf conflict.”

In an interview, Madden likened wolves to a match that’s been struck and put to a barrel of dynamite.

The dynamite represents longtime conflicts, such as the rural-urban divide and feelings of being powerless and imposed upon. She said she’s trying to address the dynamite.

“Before there were wolves in Washington, these conflict dynamics existed,” she said. “All these things were already at play.”

Months into the experiment, some WAG members say they see progress.

“These past advisory groups were going nowhere,” said Diane Gallegos, executive director of Wolf Haven International, an animal refuge in Tenino, Wash. “All of the members of this group are willing to commit to try to get to know one another as people.”

Jack Field, executive vice president of the Washington Cattlemen’s Association, said the WAG has a clearer purpose than before.

The WAG’s attention is turning toward preventing depredations and clarifying when WDFW will lethally remove wolves in the eastern one-third of Washington, where wolves are not protected under the federal Endangered Species Act.

Once past those sticky topics, Field said, the WAG can take on other issues, such as reviewing the state’s recovery goals and planning for post-recovery wolf management.

“I’d like to have everything wrapped up, get everything done in a day, but that’s a little foolish on my part,” Field said. “I’m not the most patient person, but right now I don’t see any other way.”

Madden said the WAG will take up policy questions soon.

“We are going to be diving into some of these issues this spring, absolutely,” she said.


High bidder


WDFW hired Madden a year ago for $82,000 to assess the state’s conflict over wolves.

She interviewed more than 90 people and submitted a 43-page report that observed that ranchers and environmentalists agree that emotions over wolves are intense and escalating.

The report positioned Madden to win a two-year, $850,010 contract to lead the WAG meetings, train WDFW staff members in conflict resolution and meet with other interested people, including ranchers and environmentalists.

While her work with the WAG is the most visible, Madden estimates she has talked to several hundred people about the conflict.

WDFW chose Madden over two firms, Triangle Associates of Seattle and Kearns & West Inc., which has offices in Portland, San Francisco and Washington, D.C.

Madden’s bid was roughly five times higher than the other two bids.

Her rates — $8,000 a day for “facilitation service,” $4,000 for “in-person engagement” and $400 an hour for “remote engagement” — were higher. Her bid was also increased by travel expenses.

The other firms offered the services of several associates with experience in Northwest issues such as salmon recovery, mining and sage grouse protection.

Madden’s resume has more of an international flavor, studded with work on wildlife issues in Africa and South America.

Martorello said three WDFW reviewers scored Madden’s proposal the highest.

WAG member Shawn Cantrell, Northwest director of Defenders of Wildlife, said Madden has defused tension among members of the group.

“I think she’s the real hub of this transformation going on,” he said. “I think she’s really good at having people be heard and for a lot of us that’s what we want, to be heard.”


Ranchers skeptical


The Cattle Producers of Washington quit the WAG in September, saying the panel was pointless and a forum for WDFW to talk things to death instead of controlling problem wolves. The group complained that Madden had fostered a secretive atmosphere by persuading WDFW to close portions of two WAG meetings, contrary to department policy.

The Cattle Producers’ position hasn’t changed since then, although the group’s vice president, Stevens County rancher Scott Nielsen, said he was impressed with Madden. “I think people naturally like her and naturally look to her for solutions,” he said.

But he said he can’t see the WAG being anything but counterproductive for ranchers.

Nielsen said ranchers are already attuned to protecting their herds from wolves, without the involvement of conservationists, who he said have an unrealistic confidence in deterrence measures.

“I don’t want to throw water on everything they have. You can sound so hard-nosed. ... But they’re not inventing the wheel. We’ve been living with predators a long time,” Nielsen said.

“If you are a responsible rancher, you do everything you can to protect these animals. If you don’t, then you shouldn’t be in the business,” he said.

WDFW’s policy is that it won’t consider lethal removal until at least four cows or sheep have been killed and the rancher has exhausted other ways to protect his animals. The policy — illustrated by a flow chart with lots of boxes and arrows — leaves room for interpretation.

Nielsen said the policy practically requires ranchers to wait for their animals to be harmed. The effect is to force ranchers to move on, he said.

“We end up being removed from the landscape,” he said. “You should be talking about only one” depredation.


Lawsuit effective


If one is looking for a tangible effect on Washington’s wolf policy, environmentalists willing to sue have been more influential in the past year than the WAG.

A federal judge in December ruled in favor of conservation groups that sought to keep the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services from assisting WDFW with the lethal removal of wolves.

The judge agreed with environmentalists that even though wolves are not federally protected in far Eastern Washington, Wildlife Services would have to conduct an in-depth environmental review before shooting wolves at WDFW’s request.

WDFW says it also has the ability to shoot wolves, but the department had relied on Wildlife Services.

Dashiell, the Stevens County rancher, cited the lawsuit as one reason for leaving the WAG.

Dashiell estimates he lost 300 sheep to wolves in 2014, and Wildlife Services, at WDFW’s direction, shot one adult female wolf in response. The outcome upset environmentalists and spawned the lawsuit.

“I always contended that with the first wolf that had to be killed, the cooperation was gone, and this lawsuit proved it,” Dashiell said. “It doesn’t seem like a whole lot of trust-building.”

Several conservation groups participated in the lawsuit, including Cascadia Wildlands, which is not represented on the WAG. Cascadia’s legal director, Nick Cady, said the lawsuit reflected the groups’ enmity toward Wildlife Services’ activities in the West, not an unbending opposition to lethal removal of wolves in Eastern Washington.

Environmental groups are watching the WAG, aware that lethal removal is part of the state’s wolf recovery plan, he said. “Nobody’s bailed entirely from the process yet,” he said.

Another environmental organization involved in the lawsuit was the Kettle Range Conservation Group, whose director, Tim Coleman, is on the WAG. He too said he can accept the idea of lethal removal, but he wants robust preventive measures, such as a school for range-riders.

“Because the wolf is in recovery, the public expects these extra measures be used,” Coleman said.

www.capitalpress.com/Washington/20160204/debate-without-the-howling
Nature. It's cheaper than therapy.

Offline jasnt

  • ELR junkie
  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2010
  • Posts: 6445
  • Location: deer park
  • Out shooting
  • Groups: WSTA
Re: Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions
« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2016, 08:02:07 AM »
I still feel the wag is a waste of money! They will never accept lethal removal or a hunting season :bash: 
https://www.howlforwildlife.org/take_action  It takes 10 seconds and it’s free. To easy to make an excuse not to make your voice heard!!!!!!

The commission shall attempt to maximize the public recreational game fishing and hunting opportunities of all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.
https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.04.012

Offline pianoman9701

  • Mushroom Man
  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 42831
  • Location: Vancouver USA
  • WWC, NRA Life, WFW, NAGR, RMEF, WSB, NMLS #2014743
    • www.facebook.com/johnwallacemortgage
    • Apply for a loan
Re: Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2016, 08:14:37 AM »
It's not a waste of money in the eyes of the animal rights groups, that's for sure. Thanks for posting the article, Bob.
"Restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens based on the actions of criminals and madmen will have no positive effect on the future acts of criminals and madmen. It will only serve to reduce individual rights and the very security of our republic." - Pianoman

Offline timberfaller

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2014
  • Posts: 3387
  • Location: East Wenatchee
Re: Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2016, 09:35:46 PM »
Madden is really a waste of money!!   She reminds me of being a Burnie Maydof(sp)!!

There will be no "give" by the enviro's,  its been proven time and time again, weather its animal or plant issues!!

You will rarely find a "judge" who will rule against them too!!!  To afraid of getting killed by their extremism!   Remember ALF and ELF???   They are still out there!!

The only good tree, is a stump!

Offline huntnphool

  • Chance favors the prepared mind!
  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+15)
  • Legend
  • ******
  • Join Date: Apr 2007
  • Posts: 32690
  • Location: Pacific NorthWest
Re: Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions
« Reply #4 on: February 07, 2016, 11:08:06 PM »
 She is only there to sway the minds of the ranchers, not to work for a compromise. The only people her and WDFW are looking to persuade are the hunters and ranchers.
The things that come to those who wait, may be the things left by those who got there first!

Offline UrbanTrapper

  • Life Member: NRA, SCI, DSC, NTA, WSTA, ITA, ATA
  • WA State Trappers Association
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jan 2012
  • Posts: 383
  • Location: Seattle or Kittitas County
  • Groups: NRA, SCI, WWC, HHC, NTA, WSTA
Re: Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions
« Reply #5 on: February 08, 2016, 03:36:44 AM »
... and it pisses me off that the press keeps referring to the animal rights extremists groups as 'conservation groups.' They are stealing the respect that real conservation groups have earned over the past 100 plus years.  This a common tactic used by the Left - "control the language/control the debate." I am already hearing people in Seattle ask, How can you be a 'conservationist' if you're a hunter?"  Hunters were the very FIRST conservationists and are still the ones paying for wildlife conservation all over the world.  We can't let them get away with it.  Send letters to the editor EVERY time you read where they mislabel an 'animal rights' group as a 'conservation group.'

Offline Henrydog

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 1063
  • Location: Eastern Washington
  • Groups: NRA Life Member, RMEF, Phesants Forever
Re: Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions
« Reply #6 on: February 08, 2016, 06:15:58 AM »
Just typical Lib garbage, and a waste of tax payers money.  No matter the what department you look at in this state, the answer is "no" or back end taxes from user fees to pay for this garbage.  This State and the worse offender DFW look at use like sheep with deep pockets to serve their own agenda and suffer from a huge lack of vision and leadership

Offline bearpaw

  • Family, Friends, Outdoors
  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 37052
  • Location: Idaho<->Colville
  • "Rather Be Cougar Huntin"
    • http://www.facebook.com/DaleDenney
    • Bearpaw Outfitters
  • Groups: NRA, SCI, F4WM, NWTF, IOGA, MOGA, CCOC, BBB, RMEF, WSTA, WSB
Re: Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions
« Reply #7 on: February 08, 2016, 06:34:34 AM »
She is only there to sway the minds of the ranchers, not to work for a compromise. The only people her and WDFW are looking to persuade are the hunters and ranchers.

 :yeah: Couldn't agree more, hunters and ranchers are the ones who will continue to lose, Nielsen did the smart thing rather than waste his time and then have the state say that the cattlemen were a part of the compromise forced onto ranchers and hunters.
Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!

http://bearpawoutfitters.com Guided Hunts, Unguided, & Drop Camps in Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wash. Hunts with tags available (no draw needed) for spring bear, fall bear, bison, cougar, elk, mule deer, turkey, whitetail, & wolf! http://trophymaps.com DIY Hunting Maps are also offered

Offline REHJWA

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2013
  • Posts: 1303
  • Location: Yelm
Re: Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions
« Reply #8 on: February 08, 2016, 07:25:31 AM »
Let's higher someone for five times the other bidders and get the same results. Oh yeah it's paid for with sportsman's funds not by the eco nuts....

Offline Special T

  • Truth the new Hate Speech.
  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 24823
  • Location: Skagit Valley
  • Make it Rain!
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
Re: Wolf advisory group softens rhetoric to face hard questions
« Reply #9 on: February 08, 2016, 11:08:42 AM »
Bob33 I agree with the statement in the article about this just being another issue in the Rural vs Urban conflict.  The metro area likes to stick its nose in everyone elses business.

Pointing out the law of unintended consequences is paramount to those who think steak comes wrapped in plastic... not sure that any of this would make a dent in thier logic but... How are you supposed to have free range grass fed beef at reasonable prices if the range land has wolves on it? Will feed lots become a more common source for our beef? 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I547 using Tapatalk

In archery we have something like the way of the superior man. When the archer misses the center of the target, he turns round and seeks for the cause of his failure in himself. 

Confucius

 


* Advertisement

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal