Commission invites public comments ... livestock compensation

[pianoman9701]

Here it comes, gang. The cattlemen who don't bow down and accept their fate as dished out by the outrageous wolf plan are about to get the shaft. Read the synopsis below of the predation compensation topic for this commission hearing.

Commission invites public comments on
fishery restructuring, livestock compensation

OLYMPIA - The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission will invite public comments on plans to restructure salmon and sturgeon fisheries on the lower Columbia River at a meeting scheduled Nov. 8-9 in Olympia.

In addition, the commission will take comments on new options proposed for allocating the Puget Sound shrimp catch along with a proposed update to rules for compensating landowners who lose livestock to bears, cougars and wolves.

The commission, which sets policy for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), will discuss all three issues at a public meeting in Room 172 of the Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington St. S.E., in Olympia. An agenda for the meeting is available on the commission’s website at http://goo.gl/HtqhI .

The commission will consider taking action on all three issues at a meeting scheduled in December.

Since early last month, representatives from Washington and Oregon have been meeting to discuss options for restructuring fisheries on the lower Columbia River. At the direction of Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber, fishery managers in that state have been working to develop a plan that would phase out the use of gillnets by non-tribal fishers in the mainstem lower Columbia River by 2016.

At the upcoming meeting, WDFW staff will brief the Washington commission on alternatives proposed by members of the bi-state workgroup, and their implications for Columbia River fisheries. The commission will then take public comments on those proposals, which are posted on WDFW’s website at http://goo.gl/MCG5q .

On a separate issue, the commission will discuss provisions of a new Puget Sound shrimp policy, along with proposed new options for allocating the catch of spot shrimp between recreational and commercial fisheries. Those options are posted on the commission’s website at http://goo.gl/c092L .

The commission will also invite public comments on several changes proposed in state rules for compensating ranchers and other landowners who lose livestock to predatory carnivores. Those changes would:

    Give top priority for compensation to ranchers who sign cooperative agreements with WDFW committing them to use non-lethal measures to protect their livestock.
    Provide compensation for guard dogs and other animals used to guard livestock.
    Allow ranchers to receive compensation for weight loss in livestock and other effects of wildlife predation that are not directly tied to the death or injury of an animal.
    Establish a new way to determine the value of livestock lost to predation.

Prior to discussing that issue, commissioners are scheduled to attend an annual meeting with Gov. Chris Gregoire in the Governor’s office. The Governor appoints commission members to six-year terms, subject to confirmation by the state Senate.

Additional information about the commission and upcoming meetings is available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/ . 


The ranchers and all of us have had this unreasonable wolf plan shoved down their (our) throats. Now, regardless of the fact that their fears were unheard and are now coming to fruition, they must comply or lose out on compensation. Why? Because the WDFW sorely underestimated the costs of controlling wolves in our state and is now panicking. They're desperately seeking ways to lower their liability in this case, liability caused by an over-zealous plan and kowtowing to the greenies, people with no stake in this issue at all. The wolves are everything we warned them they would be and more. Now, it's the rancher's responsibility. This is outrageous.
PMan

[Maverick]

Wow. This is Rediculous!!!!! 

Wolves need to be hunted. Why does the state have to make things so hard? All these greenies are wanting to protect wolves when then aren't even ranchers or hunters. They don't have any money put into this. They have no reason to have a say. If they love wolves so much then put them over there. Us east siders don't want them!!! If the greenies want wolves so bad then make a wolf tax for anyone that doesn't hunt. See how much they love them after that. I'm sorry for rambling but I'm just so sick of how our state handles the wolves.

[Killmore]

public comments are a joke ,why should a farmer have to sign any agreement, oh wait ,so the department has more control over you..

[Special T]

   I'm sure there are going to be a few geuinni pigs that will sign up, but if EVERYONE signed up there would be NO $$$ for compensation...Signing an agreement with the State is like doing a deal with the Mob. Once your in its IMPOSSIBLE to get out!

[bobcat]

reason to have a say. If they love wolves so much then put them over there. Us east siders don't want them!!!

Well, us west siders don't want them either. Why is it that people often assume that those living on the west side of the state are wolf lovers?

I'm sure there are plenty of wolf lovers in Spokane.

[Special T]

BC you and i don't want them here, but you know that if there were wolf issues in the Issaquah to north bend area The seattle metro area would be more interested

[bobcat]

Right.

But, I don't like the term "westsiders" being used, as if everyone that lives here is the same.

[pianoman9701]

I think we should have them as close to Oly and Seattle as possible, maybe even down here in Vantucky. It's the only way these stupid, west-side greenies are going to understand the problem - when it's in their backyard. Otherwise, it's just a problem for someone else that they get to interfere with.

[Special T]

Would Californicators be a better term? 

[bobcat]

Would Californicators be a better term? 

No. We have people on this forum who moved here from California, and they are not wolf lovers.

How about just using the term "wolf lover" rather than lumping people into one category based on nothing more than where they happen to live?

[sebek556]

  once again the department chooses the have public comments when and where the people being affected by the issues directly, can not attend. Hunters and cattle ranchers are extremely busy this time of year, bring in the herd, setting up barns ,feeders etc. Most of them cannot afford the take a day off this time of year to drive over and listen to all the hippies tell them how they should be living. 

[bearpaw]

Would Californicators be a better term? 

No. We have people on this forum who moved here from California, and they are not wolf lovers.

How about just using the term "wolf lover" rather than lumping people into one category based on nothing more than where they happen to live?

  I have no problem using the term 'wolf lover"!

Piano, does it say the commission is going to require ranchers to sign the agreement? Perhaps the adjustments to the compensation fund are meant to be an improvement?

[pianoman9701]

That is the full notice and you may be correct. This may be an improvement in the works. However, with the bad press that the McIrvins got with the whole Wedge Pack fiasco (helped by the DFW stating that the rancher was not cooperative), and the incredibly high cost of the operation to the state, I find it doubtful that our DFW is looking to give ranchers a break here. Much more likely is it that they're going to add conditions under which claims may be paid out for losses due to wolf predation.

[Maverick]

Bobcat your right. i apologise.

[Special T]

Would Californicators be a better term? 

No. We have people on this forum who moved here from California, and they are not wolf lovers.

How about just using the term "wolf lover" rather than lumping people into one category based on nothing more than where they happen to live?

I mostly said that toung in cheek.