Federal judge rejects wolf kills in state

[MuleDeer]

I've been around since the plan was written, too, and no, I don't agree with how it was written either.  But, I also know the best way to get things done isn't to throw tantrums, but to work diligently through the process to get the system changed.  We had someone throw a tantrum on Monday at the WAG meeting, and he was quickly escorted out of the room.  And he was an extreme wolf advocate, not a hunter.
I was happy to see some comments from a couple people that attended the WAG meeting.  Not all their comments were completely accurate, but they were trying to convey some of what went on.  I appreciate that.  But I'd ask all of you, "Other than posting on this forum, what are you doing to try and make a difference?"  Typing your thoughts, tantrums, rants, complaints, whatever you want to call them on this forum aren't doing much, as you are speaking to the choir.  Maybe you're doing more; I hope so.  In another year or so when they ask for new members for the WAG to apply, why not try that?  Get right into the middle of the debate with the group that can have some impact on things.  Or attend every WDFW meeting you can to make your voice heard.  The one thing I ask everyone to do on this forum is to attend a WAG meeting and see for yourself.  Most of what you all are posting here is far from what is happening at those meetings.  Use the opportunity to get a clearer picture of what is going on.  It does no good to spread rumors or assumptions.  Read the minutes from the meeting first, at least, so you get some idea of what is really going on in the WAG meetings.

[Bob33]

I've been around since the plan was written, too, and no, I don't agree with how it was written either.  But, I also know the best way to get things done isn't to throw tantrums, but to work diligently through the process to get the system changed.  We had someone throw a tantrum on Monday at the WAG meeting, and he was quickly escorted out of the room.  And he was an extreme wolf advocate, not a hunter.
I was happy to see some comments from a couple people that attended the WAG meeting.  Not all their comments were completely accurate, but they were trying to convey some of what went on.  I appreciate that.  But I'd ask all of you, "Other than posting on this forum, what are you doing to try and make a difference?"  Typing your thoughts, tantrums, rants, complaints, whatever you want to call them on this forum aren't doing much, as you are speaking to the choir.  Maybe you're doing more; I hope so.  In another year or so when they ask for new members for the WAG to apply, why not try that?  Get right into the middle of the debate with the group that can have some impact on things.  Or attend every WDFW meeting you can to make your voice heard.  The one thing I ask everyone to do on this forum is to attend a WAG meeting and see for yourself.  Most of what you all are posting here is far from what is happening at those meetings.  Use the opportunity to get a clearer picture of what is going on.  It does no good to spread rumors or assumptions.  Read the minutes from the meeting first, at least, so you get some idea of what is really going on in the WAG meetings.

Thank you for your comments and perspective.

[MuleDeer]

I know the wolf plan backwards and forwards. I've been involved in this from nearly the start in WA It was devised in such a way as to take the longest possible time to accomplish. A great many of us recognized this a long time ago and have protested its components. It needs to be amended or scrapped and re-written so the people of the NE and the wildlife get some relief. I would like to see you and others throw tantrums and get this plan changed because it is disastrous in its consequences. You don't have to speak half truths to be ticked off about what's going on.

By the way, all the things you mentioned here are and have been brought up and discussed by the WAG, including all members.  Every member recognizes that it is not working, and we have discussions constantly to try and figure out the solution.  It's not as easy as scrapping it and re-writing, but it is an option.  Just not as easy as some would think it is.  That's where the process comes in.  And in the meantime, because that process IS going to take a while, we are looking at the best options for helping those most affected in the NE corner of the state.  That does include lethal controls, better tools to use in preventing any wolf interactions, and anything else we have at our disposal to offer.  And I know you think I'm on the "wrong side of this issue" by saying this, but EVERY member of the group is working right now towards those common goals to help not only our livestock producers, but hunters and our wildlife as well.  Isn't cooperation between all members what we should be hoping for, instead of assuming all members are suddenly wolf advocates because we are finding a way to work together?

[pianoman9701]

I attend all sorts of WDFW meetings. I've met with wildlife managers and bios more than a dozen times. I tried to attend the WAG meeting in Spokane in May and was refused. It's difficult for people like me in the SW corner to get those opportunities with the WAG and it sucks when they're sqaundered. I speak eloquently and I don't exaggerate. I also don't like having smoke blown up my backside, as with the hoof disease panel. I stay informed and I know a little bit about wildlife management and conservation. I've seen the difference between what the guys in the field do (the bios and the LE), and what the administration does. All in all, I'm very impressed with the workers and not-so-much with the admin. If you were addressing me when you spoke about people who rant in the forum and do little else, you missed the mark.

[huntnphool]

Interesting that at least one of the parties named on the suit are also members of the WAG. Who would have thought that a member of the WAG would end up suing the WDFW over killing wolves? Oh that's right, it was I and a few others. The Wildlife Commission has appointed several animal rights groups to the WAG and will spend our hunter and fisher dollars to defend their plans in federal court against groups which have advance warning of those plans from sitting on the advisory group which recommends them. At the very least, this is negligence in the operation of the department. At worst, this is collusion with anti-hunting groups to subvert hunting in our state. If you didn't see this coming, you're blind as a bat.

Anther fact check:
1. The wildlife Commission did not appoint the members to WAG.  They had nothing to do with it.
2. Our "Hunter and Fisher" dollars, or Pittman-Robertson funds, cannot be used by the animal rights groups or     WAG or the Wildlife Commission.
3.  There are 14 other members on the WAG, other than the animal rights groups you mention, so it's not like they are getting information that isn't also known by the other interests represented, namely livestock producers and hunters.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

 Maybe you can answer the simple question that nobody else seems to know the answer to? Who appoints the WAG members that are supposed to be speaking for me?

[MuleDeer]

I'm glad you're one of the active ones...there are way too few.  And I think we would all agree with you that the work done in and by the field staff are what makes the most difference.  I don't know too many that are all that enthralled by the admins within our agencies, both state and federal.
All I'm trying to do is encourage people to make the time to be heard, like you do.  Yes, it's hard for many, but there is opportunity, and it makes a difference.  To all those who wonder why WDFW doesn't give enough credit for all that we as sportsmen provide to them?  In my opinion, it's because we don't demand it, and we should!  We are being drowned out in public opinion by those who are zealots for their beliefs, because they are trying to earn their rights, many times for the first time.  We should fight just as hard to earn the privilege to hunt and not treat it as if it is a right.  If we don't mount an offensive and make ourselves heard soon, we will lose what we all love so much.  The sooner we all take that as a serious threat, the sooner we can organize and start to make a difference.

[Bob33]

Interesting that at least one of the parties named on the suit are also members of the WAG. Who would have thought that a member of the WAG would end up suing the WDFW over killing wolves? Oh that's right, it was I and a few others. The Wildlife Commission has appointed several animal rights groups to the WAG and will spend our hunter and fisher dollars to defend their plans in federal court against groups which have advance warning of those plans from sitting on the advisory group which recommends them. At the very least, this is negligence in the operation of the department. At worst, this is collusion with anti-hunting groups to subvert hunting in our state. If you didn't see this coming, you're blind as a bat.

Anther fact check:
1. The wildlife Commission did not appoint the members to WAG.  They had nothing to do with it.
2. Our "Hunter and Fisher" dollars, or Pittman-Robertson funds, cannot be used by the animal rights groups or     WAG or the Wildlife Commission.
3.  There are 14 other members on the WAG, other than the animal rights groups you mention, so it's not like they are getting information that isn't also known by the other interests represented, namely livestock producers and hunters.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

 Maybe you can answer the simple question that nobody else seems to know the answer to? Who appoints the WAG members that are supposed to be speaking for me?

Wolf Advisory Group (WAG) Guidelines
Version 1
• Appointment: Wolf Advisory Group Members will be appointed by the Director. All members’ first term will expire on December 31, 2014; subsequent appointments will be for a period of two calendar years; members are eligible for reappointment.
• Membership Composition: The group will have 9 members, drawn from each of the following: livestock industry, environmental, and hunting organizations. WDFW personnel participating during meetings are not WAG members.
• Alternate Members: Each Advisory Group member may identify one individual to serve as an alternate when the appointed member cannot attend meetings.
• Lead: WDFW Game Division Manager will lead the group and develop the meeting agendas, which will be shared with and approved by the Advisory Group. The Advisory Group will determine meeting dates. Whenever possible, the Department will provide a facilitator for the meetings.
• Meeting Attendance: Meetings will be open to the general public. Time will be allocated at the end of meetings for the public to address WAG.
• Meeting Breaks: Members may request a recess during meetings to consult with others in attendance.
• Meeting Record Keeping: Minutes of each meeting will be taken and posted on the web page.
• Meeting Location: The meeting place will rotate around the state, unless weather conditions or other factors dictate an alternate location or the use of teleconference or phone conference technology. All scheduled Advisory Group meetings will be held at locations that provide reasonable accommodations for members of the public and persons-of-disability to attend.
• Minimum Number of Meetings: There will be a minimum of four Advisory Group business meetings held annually. Group business will be conducted at these meetings, regardless of the number of members present.
• Decision Making: The Department will carefully consider information provided by WAG members in its decision making, including any recommendations it may make to the Fish and Wildlife Commission concerning wolf conservation and management. WDFW will make final decision regarding all products and final outcomes. Members are expected to express whether or not their represented group can accept what is being proposed and to explain why they can or cannot accept the proposed action. The Department will provide feedback regarding decisions the Department makes; this feedback shall articulate all views provided and how the Department determined their action, final decision, or outcome.

[MuleDeer]

Interesting that at least one of the parties named on the suit are also members of the WAG. Who would have thought that a member of the WAG would end up suing the WDFW over killing wolves? Oh that's right, it was I and a few others. The Wildlife Commission has appointed several animal rights groups to the WAG and will spend our hunter and fisher dollars to defend their plans in federal court against groups which have advance warning of those plans from sitting on the advisory group which recommends them. At the very least, this is negligence in the operation of the department. At worst, this is collusion with anti-hunting groups to subvert hunting in our state. If you didn't see this coming, you're blind as a bat.

Anther fact check:
1. The wildlife Commission did not appoint the members to WAG.  They had nothing to do with it.
2. Our "Hunter and Fisher" dollars, or Pittman-Robertson funds, cannot be used by the animal rights groups or     WAG or the Wildlife Commission.
3.  There are 14 other members on the WAG, other than the animal rights groups you mention, so it's not like they are getting information that isn't also known by the other interests represented, namely livestock producers and hunters.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

 Maybe you can answer the simple question that nobody else seems to know the answer to? Who appoints the WAG members that are supposed to be speaking for me?

Simple answer.  The appointments were made by the Director.  Input was given by dept leads in WDFW, such as game managers, but the appointment is at the Director's discretion.  It's outlined in the first directive of the WAG Guidelines on the WDFW website.

[wolfbait]

Federal judge rejects wolf kills in state

http://www.king5.com/story/tech/science/environment/2015/12/21/federal-judge-rejects-wolf-kills-state/77725338/

Please include all facts when you post items like this to fire people up.  For example, the fact that lethal actions can and will still be taken on wolves in WA state.  Just not by Wildlife Services.  Lethal action will be done by WDFW.

I posted a link to an article, after this would you like me to get with you first, maybe find out how you want things posted? Hate the thought of firing people up.

I think I would rather have the USFWS taking care of the problem wolves as they have been doing it far longer then WDFW. And as far as WDFW handling problem wolves to date, they have been terrible, heck they can't even find wolf packs under their nose that need confirming.

Wolf history and WDFW go back 13+ years, and as you probably know history tells quite a bit about those we are dealing with. Do you think the WAG and the $850,000 consultant are going to change how WDFW manage wolves?

[Curly]

Federal judge rejects wolf kills in state

http://www.king5.com/story/tech/science/environment/2015/12/21/federal-judge-rejects-wolf-kills-state/77725338/

"Wolves were hunted to extinction in Washington at the turn of the last century. But they started migrating into Washington from neighboring areas in the early 2000s and there are an estimated 16 wolf packs in the state, all in Eastern Washington. There have been conflicts between wolves and ranchers."

I guess if they tell the lies enough it becomes truth....

I don't think they have ever been completely gone in the state. If they were exterminated, they've been coming back a lot longer than since the 2000's.

I guess it just bugs me whenever I read the above statements.

[JDHasty]

Appointment: Wolf Advisory Group Members will be appointed by the Director.

That is all you need to know.  I have been actively involved in advocacy work for disabled persons e.g. ADA

There are Disability Task Forces, ADA Advisory Committees, Barrier Free Working Groups or what ever the heck name they decide on in every decent size town and county and at the State level.  Each and every time one of these is set up it is the Mayor, County Executive, Governor etc etc etc who gets final say on who sits in those chairs.  The people from the disabled community who are selected are selected because they are easily manipulated and controlled and are likable and they will never say anything regarding the fact that the whole damnable thing is a sham from Alpha to Omega.  These phony baloney Advisory Committees are there for one purpose and one purpose alone, and that purpose is NOT to make certain that the people who are most affected by policies and programs are not given short shrift. 

[MuleDeer]

Federal judge rejects wolf kills in state

http://www.king5.com/story/tech/science/environment/2015/12/21/federal-judge-rejects-wolf-kills-state/77725338/

Please include all facts when you post items like this to fire people up.  For example, the fact that lethal actions can and will still be taken on wolves in WA state.  Just not by Wildlife Services.  Lethal action will be done by WDFW.

I posted a link to an article, after this would you like me to get with you first, maybe find out how you want things posted? Hate the thought of firing people up.

I think I would rather have the USFWS taking care of the problem wolves as they have been doing it far longer then WDFW. And as far as WDFW handling problem wolves to date, they have been terrible, heck they can't even find wolf packs under their nose that need confirming.

Wolf history and WDFW go back 13+ years, and as you probably know history tells quite a bit about those we are dealing with. Do you think the WAG and the $850,000 consultant are going to change how WDFW manage wolves?

Do I think the WAG can change the way WDFW manages wolves?  Yes, I do.  That's why I applied for a position, and why I am still there fighting for "our side".  And no, don't bother contacting me to make sure you post the way I want, just post all the facts, instead of trying to stir the pot like the press does with their "partial headlines" to get a rise out of people.  If your goal is to educate people, then educate them with everything we can, not just the 1/2 truths to go for the most shock possible. 

[MuleDeer]

Appointment: Wolf Advisory Group Members will be appointed by the Director.

That is all you need to know.  I have been actively involved in advocacy work for disabled persons e.g. ADA

There are Disability Task Forces, ADA Advisory Committees, Barrier Free Working Groups or what ever the heck name they decide on in every decent size town and county and at the State level.  Each and every time one of these is set up it is the Mayor, County Executive, Governor etc etc etc who gets final say on who sits in those chairs.  The people from the disabled community who are selected are selected because they are easily manipulated and controlled and are likable and they will never say anything regarding the fact that the whole damnable thing is a sham from Alpha to Omega.  These phony baloney Advisory Committees are there for one purpose and one purpose alone, and that purpose is NOT to make certain that the people who are most affected by policies and programs are not given short shrift.

It's a shame you're so jaded.  If you don't want to attend a WAG meeting to find out for yourself, why don't you ask any of the people in that room, on the WAG, or in the dept. if they consider me "easily manipulated or controlled".  And the part about not speaking up and calling out the parties that should be?  Attend a meeting...you will see that not only I, but many on the WAG are calling out WDFW and the wolf advocates.  You guys and your opinions about the WAG, when you obviously know nothing about this group, are part of the problem with hunters not getting involved.  You sit there and say it's all a sham, nothing matters, our voice isn't heard, they don't care if we show up at meetings......on and on.  Imagine one of the MANY new hunters that come to these forums to learn and meet people.  What are they supposed to think when all they read from so many of you is hatred and defeatism towards WDFW, our state, and the state of our wildlife?  We should be encouraging every single hunter to be part of the process, not cutting them down and saying they are wasting their time by caring. 
Anyone that wants to talk further with me about any of this, all my personal info is in my profile and in my first few posts.  Call or email anytime you want.

[wolfbait]

Federal judge rejects wolf kills in state

http://www.king5.com/story/tech/science/environment/2015/12/21/federal-judge-rejects-wolf-kills-state/77725338/

Please include all facts when you post items like this to fire people up.  For example, the fact that lethal actions can and will still be taken on wolves in WA state.  Just not by Wildlife Services.  Lethal action will be done by WDFW.

I posted a link to an article, after this would you like me to get with you first, maybe find out how you want things posted? Hate the thought of firing people up.

I think I would rather have the USFWS taking care of the problem wolves as they have been doing it far longer then WDFW. And as far as WDFW handling problem wolves to date, they have been terrible, heck they can't even find wolf packs under their nose that need confirming.

Wolf history and WDFW go back 13+ years, and as you probably know history tells quite a bit about those we are dealing with. Do you think the WAG and the $850,000 consultant are going to change how WDFW manage wolves?

Do I think the WAG can change the way WDFW manages wolves?  Yes, I do.  That's why I applied for a position, and why I am still there fighting for "our side".  And no, don't bother contacting me to make sure you post the way I want, just post all the facts, instead of trying to stir the pot like the press does with their "partial headlines" to get a rise out of people.  If your goal is to educate people, then educate them with everything we can, not just the 1/2 truths to go for the most shock possible.

I seem to be having a bit of trouble getting all the facts like you wanted MD, maybe you can help me out with the info. below.


Where did WA's wolves come from?

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Northern Rocky Mountain Recovery Program Update

2008-Until 2008, no wild wolves had been confirmed west of the DPS boundary in Washington or Oregon. However, in July 2008, a wolf pack (2 adults and 6 pups) was discovered near Twisp, WA (just east of the North Cascades and west of the DPS boundary). Genetic testing showed these wolves did not originate from the NRM DPS; instead they apparently dispersed southward from the wolf population in southcentral British Columbia
http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/annualrpt08/FINAL_2008_USFWS_Recovery_Program_Update_3-17-09.pdf

July 24, 2008
DNA tests showed that the wolves originated from a population in the northern British Columbia and Alberta provinces of Canada.
“This is a natural colonization,” said Fitkin. “The wolves are naturally immigrating.”http://www.conservationnw.org/news/pressroom/press-clips/dna-samples-confirm-gray-wolves-are-back-in-methow-valley

Jun 25, 2013-“DNA obtained from Lookout Pack wolves has shown they are descendents of wolves living in coastal British Columbia”, who lived separately from inland wolves for many generations, “Conservation Northwest” said in a press release. http://methowvalleynews.com/2013/06/25/will-federal-delisting-impact-states-wolves/

[CAMPMEAT]

How much money does the average hunters association have, to fight the billionaires, that dish out millions upon millions to save the wolves ? That's the reason why going to meetings is worthless..Name ANY animal rights group that looses to the average hunting groups, MuleDeer ?