Wash. Wolf Advisory Group member resigns amid tension

[Special T]

Just because your a hunter and work for one of those agencies does not translate into a vested interest in the issue for the organization you work for. Great photo and great memory for sure. Perhaps CNW is the least offensive of the 3 but what I will say is that if your a hunter and work for either of the other 2  your a Hippocrate and a lier by omission at a minimum.

The simple fact is that sportsmen open up their wallets usually in direct repsponce to specific projects. Most conservation groups spend their effort doing studies to sue people and taking grants to do more paperwork than boots on the ground work.

[MuleDeer]

Pine tar that is some amazing statistics. Too bad the financial contribution we make is overlooked. It's unfortunate that more sportsmen didn't show up. Unlike the fake conservationist that show up we have jobs to tend and families also. Facts haven't corrected the direction of the issue. The line in the article that says it all for me is that" if we move too quick we risk a lawsuit" it's laughable because history of the other states show us there will be lawsuits regardless. I believe this process is just to placate ranchers and sportsmen so that there isn't wholesale rebellion. The wdfw has those amazing $ stats and still treats sportsmen like red headed stepchildren.

It's obvious to me that the department is ok with its own slow demise but afraid of a show down with those groups that have little to no skin in the game. I sometimes wonder if I really should have raised hell with everyone who would listen when the wdfw pleaded with us to prevent a merger with don't/parks. Would we have faired well. Probably not but perhaps a bunch of the clowns that run things would have been sent packing. Who knows perhaps there would be some hunting in parks like there is in the mid west

The figures that were passed out Sunday night were very talked about on Monday, and even DofW, CNW and HSUS admitted that the contributions of hunters cannot be overlooked.  It wasn't brushed under the rug at all, but talked about by more than a few people on Monday.  Curious who the "fake conservationist" is that attends the WAG meetings?  Every sportsman's group represented there is the real deal, and care about the issues we are facing.  One thing everyone needs to realize is that the sportsman also recognize that we are going to have a lot better chance at positive results by working with the livestock producers to get things done...they are the one group with the most to lose, as far as a livelihood goes, so it is the easiest, best way to start the process.  Hunters had their weekend in Spokane, and some great points were made.  But, other than for the money we provide, we have the weakest argument and the quietist voice...good reason for more hunters to show up at the meetings, especially in Olympia!
If you really want to know what's going on in the WAG meetings, go to the website and read the transcripts.  Every word and discussion is recorded, so if you want to know exactly what was said, read it for yourself, don't take the word from one of us that was sitting in the room.  Misinformation is worse at times than no information...be informed and make your own voice heard.

Pretty sad that "we have the weakest argument". Why wouldn't we include the money we bring to the table? You saying that kind of reminds me of that old saying. "Other than that how was the play Mrs Lincoln?"

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Did you not read the text that you quoted?  It says plainly that the dollars we bring to the table were talked about many times, and by ALL groups on the WAG.  The reason I said we have the weakest argument is, the loss of ungulates are an immediate problem to us as hunters, but it does not hold the same public urgency as the loss of livestock and, therefore, a way of life and income for a producer.  The "quietest voice"?  That's all our fault for being silent way too long.

[grundy53]

Pine tar that is some amazing statistics. Too bad the financial contribution we make is overlooked. It's unfortunate that more sportsmen didn't show up. Unlike the fake conservationist that show up we have jobs to tend and families also. Facts haven't corrected the direction of the issue. The line in the article that says it all for me is that" if we move too quick we risk a lawsuit" it's laughable because history of the other states show us there will be lawsuits regardless. I believe this process is just to placate ranchers and sportsmen so that there isn't wholesale rebellion. The wdfw has those amazing $ stats and still treats sportsmen like red headed stepchildren.

It's obvious to me that the department is ok with its own slow demise but afraid of a show down with those groups that have little to no skin in the game. I sometimes wonder if I really should have raised hell with everyone who would listen when the wdfw pleaded with us to prevent a merger with don't/parks. Would we have faired well. Probably not but perhaps a bunch of the clowns that run things would have been sent packing. Who knows perhaps there would be some hunting in parks like there is in the mid west

The figures that were passed out Sunday night were very talked about on Monday, and even DofW, CNW and HSUS admitted that the contributions of hunters cannot be overlooked.  It wasn't brushed under the rug at all, but talked about by more than a few people on Monday.  Curious who the "fake conservationist" is that attends the WAG meetings?  Every sportsman's group represented there is the real deal, and care about the issues we are facing.  One thing everyone needs to realize is that the sportsman also recognize that we are going to have a lot better chance at positive results by working with the livestock producers to get things done...they are the one group with the most to lose, as far as a livelihood goes, so it is the easiest, best way to start the process.  Hunters had their weekend in Spokane, and some great points were made.  But, other than for the money we provide, we have the weakest argument and the quietist voice...good reason for more hunters to show up at the meetings, especially in Olympia!
If you really want to know what's going on in the WAG meetings, go to the website and read the transcripts.  Every word and discussion is recorded, so if you want to know exactly what was said, read it for yourself, don't take the word from one of us that was sitting in the room.  Misinformation is worse at times than no information...be informed and make your own voice heard.

Pretty sad that "we have the weakest argument". Why wouldn't we include the money we bring to the table? You saying that kind of reminds me of that old saying. "Other than that how was the play Mrs Lincoln?"

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Did you not read the text that you quoted?  It says plainly that the dollars we bring to the table were talked about many times, and by ALL groups on the WAG.  The reason I said we have the weakest argument is, the loss of ungulates are an immediate problem to us as hunters, but it does not hold the same public urgency as the loss of livestock and, therefore, a way of life and income for a producer.  The "quietest voice"?  That's all our fault for being silent way too long.

Did you not read the text you wrote? "Other than for the money we provide, we have the weakest argument". I was simply wondering why you would discount the money we bring in. Seeing as how it is magnitudes more than any other group. I also agree that the livestock growers have the strongest argument. However, how is our argument weaker than HSUS's? DOW's? CNW's?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[MuleDeer]

Pine tar that is some amazing statistics. Too bad the financial contribution we make is overlooked. It's unfortunate that more sportsmen didn't show up. Unlike the fake conservationist that show up we have jobs to tend and families also. Facts haven't corrected the direction of the issue. The line in the article that says it all for me is that" if we move too quick we risk a lawsuit" it's laughable because history of the other states show us there will be lawsuits regardless. I believe this process is just to placate ranchers and sportsmen so that there isn't wholesale rebellion. The wdfw has those amazing $ stats and still treats sportsmen like red headed stepchildren.

It's obvious to me that the department is ok with its own slow demise but afraid of a show down with those groups that have little to no skin in the game. I sometimes wonder if I really should have raised hell with everyone who would listen when the wdfw pleaded with us to prevent a merger with don't/parks. Would we have faired well. Probably not but perhaps a bunch of the clowns that run things would have been sent packing. Who knows perhaps there would be some hunting in parks like there is in the mid west

The figures that were passed out Sunday night were very talked about on Monday, and even DofW, CNW and HSUS admitted that the contributions of hunters cannot be overlooked.  It wasn't brushed under the rug at all, but talked about by more than a few people on Monday.  Curious who the "fake conservationist" is that attends the WAG meetings?  Every sportsman's group represented there is the real deal, and care about the issues we are facing.  One thing everyone needs to realize is that the sportsman also recognize that we are going to have a lot better chance at positive results by working with the livestock producers to get things done...they are the one group with the most to lose, as far as a livelihood goes, so it is the easiest, best way to start the process.  Hunters had their weekend in Spokane, and some great points were made.  But, other than for the money we provide, we have the weakest argument and the quietist voice...good reason for more hunters to show up at the meetings, especially in Olympia!
If you really want to know what's going on in the WAG meetings, go to the website and read the transcripts.  Every word and discussion is recorded, so if you want to know exactly what was said, read it for yourself, don't take the word from one of us that was sitting in the room.  Misinformation is worse at times than no information...be informed and make your own voice heard.

Pretty sad that "we have the weakest argument". Why wouldn't we include the money we bring to the table? You saying that kind of reminds me of that old saying. "Other than that how was the play Mrs Lincoln?"

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Did you not read the text that you quoted?  It says plainly that the dollars we bring to the table were talked about many times, and by ALL groups on the WAG.  The reason I said we have the weakest argument is, the loss of ungulates are an immediate problem to us as hunters, but it does not hold the same public urgency as the loss of livestock and, therefore, a way of life and income for a producer.  The "quietest voice"?  That's all our fault for being silent way too long.

Did you not read the text you wrote? "Other than for the money we provide, we have the weakest argument". I was simply wondering why you would discount the money we bring in. Seeing as how it is magnitudes more than any other group. I also agree that the livestock growers have the strongest argument. However, how is our argument weaker than HSUS's? DOW's? CNW's?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Yes I did.  Read it again and you might understand it.  I didn't discount the funds at all, I emphasized them.  Hence the wording "Other than for the money we provide"  That is our strongest argument, ungulates are not.  I'm just stating the facts as they are seen in public, not making the choice myself.  Our argument isn't weaker than the wolf advocates, just much more silent.  And that's our fault.  My quote about ours being the weakest was referring to the side of wolf management, not advocacy.

[CAMPMEAT]

Doesn't CNW and other groups like it, spend someone else's donations of millions and millions of dollars, like a drunken sailor ? If those donations dried up instantly, we might have a chance to fight them, otherwise, we're screwed like I've said before.....

[Special T]

I have to give MuleDeer lots of props fro coming on here and giving it to us straight. Hopefully you dont take our frustration, complaints, and venom personally. You are doing a good thing for us... There is very little way I could sit down with some of those clowns. There lack of vested interest, their ignorance, and antagonism would get the better of me. Here is to a happy New Year MuleDeer!

[MuleDeer]

I have to give MuleDeer lots of props fro coming on here and giving it to us straight. Hopefully you dont take our frustration, complaints, and venom personally. You are doing a good thing for us... There is very little way I could sit down with some of those clowns. There lack of vested interest, their ignorance, and antagonism would get the better of me. Here is to a happy New Year MuleDeer!

Thanks Special T, I do appreciate that.  I understand everyone's frustration, and, sometimes it's hard not to take it personal, but I know it's a very volatile issue, and I just happen to take a different approach than some others.  My goal is to provide facts, and I do my best to avoid ever writing my "opinion", as it isn't necessarily always qualified.  Besides, facts are harder to argue than someone's opinion.  Let me know if there are ever any questions, and I'll do my best to answer!  Happy New Year!