An Open Dialogue With WDFW Wolf Plan Consultant Francine Madden

[pianoman9701]

This has been a rigged game from the beginning, Josh, and you know it. The organizations like DOW wrote the position papers that the USFWS read to Congress to get this thing pushed through. The testimony was so filled with errors and outright lies as to be criminal. They lied about economic impact, they lied about disease, they lied that wolves would create a natural balance. And this has been a huge cash cow for DOW, Earthfirst, HSUS, Sierra Club, and many more. One or two pictures of a dead wolf and the threat of them being "exterminated" sends hundreds of thousands of dollars to each of these organizations. And it could only have happened with the assistance of the USFWS and the WDFW. And then, those donations go right to the politicians who support them and their goals.

One example is that USFWS told Congress that all of the wolves had been wormed...twice, which they had. However, it was the wrong medication for e. granulosus and the parasite remained active in the released wolves. There was no further testing data made available before release. Ed Bangs was fully aware of the parasite's existence in the original 66. A study by the U of ID in 2012 shows that anywhere from a minimum of 64-85% of captured grey wolves they tested were positive for this parasite, depending on the test area.

So, if you want to sit at the table and have smoke blown up your dark places, by all means, do. But it won't change the wolf plan and it won't change the influence peddling from the animal rights people to those in power. There's far too much political money at stake for real science to interfere.

[andersonjk4]

I don't want to put words in jackelope's mouth, but I think he is talking big picture.  Not just about the management of wolves in this state. 

The current role of Francine may be involving the wolf plan, but the larger theme of this thread is the need to increase and unify the voice of the hunting community.  I think that is what jackelope was getting at. 

[huntnphool]

 Well let's see how long they drag their feet in replacing the "hunters" voice.

[ribka]

I don't want to put words in jackelope's mouth, but I think he is talking big picture.  Not just about the management of wolves in this state. 

The current role of Francine may be involving the wolf plan, but the larger theme of this thread is the need to increase and unify the voice of the hunting community.  I think that is what jackelope was getting at.

Its difficult to find a sportsmen's group who has a voice in this state. Already Member of RMEF mule deer foundation

Is this group worth supporting and sending in a donation?

http://huntersheritagecouncil.org/hhc-pac.html

[jackelope]

I don't want to put words in jackelope's mouth, but I think he is talking big picture.  Not just about the management of wolves in this state. 

The current role of Francine may be involving the wolf plan, but the larger theme of this thread is the need to increase and unify the voice of the hunting community.  I think that is what jackelope was getting at.

Its difficult to find a sportsmen's group who has a voice in this state. Already Member of RMEF mule deer foundation

Is this group worth supporting and sending in a donation?

http://huntersheritagecouncil.org/hhc-pac.html

Yes, as is Washingtonians for Wildlife.

I'm absolutely not talking about "only" wolf management. I'm talking about everything.

[jackelope]

I don't want to put words in jackelope's mouth, but I think he is talking big picture.  Not just about the management of wolves in this state. 

The current role of Francine may be involving the wolf plan, but the larger theme of this thread is the need to increase and unify the voice of the hunting community.  I think that is what jackelope was getting at. 

Jackpot...

Well let's see how long they drag their feet in replacing the "hunters" voice.

Any suggestions for a volunteer to replace that person? I predict nobody will want to volunteer...wait for it!!!

[KFhunter]

The wrong volunteer would do us more harm than good, a single voice against a bunch of others they tend to get overwhelmed and make concessions then later wonder what just happened in there   

We need a trained person supported by a big .org

[CGDucksandDeer]

Thanks for reaching out to Francine, Jake. And for sharing this detailed information and thoughtful dialogue. It's refreshing compared to what some seem to prefer to share on this forum regarding such issues.

I personally don't relish how much the state is spending on her contract, especially with enforcement grossly underfunded and important programs for hunters and anglers on the chopping block. But having been deeply involved in this issue since 2014, I will go out on a limb and say we're lucky to have Francine working to bring diverse stakeholders to the table and moving forward. Including towards accepting lethal removals and eventually, some sort of proactive management through regulated hunts (something I fully support). Without Francine, I'm certain we'd be in a much worse and more expensive place right now, with radical out-of-state litigious groups like the Center for Biological Diversity holding greater influence.

I do very much believe that WDFW needs to do a better job of communicating exactly where this money is coming from, which is general fund appropriations from the legislature and special wildlife license plate revenue, NOT hunting and fishing license revenues. I've made that concern known to the Department, and hope it happens.

As a hunter, I've also been concerned about the lack of active and vocal sportsman's representation on the WAG, especially since Dan left. Nothing against the hunters still on that advisory group, but hunters need a more vocal voice, and some of the current hunting reps seem to want to stay quiet and allow other stakeholders to hold the spotlight.

The "white paper" that Washington Cattlemen’s Association, Cattle Producers of Washington, Washingtonians for Wildlife Conservation, Washington State Sheep Producers, Hunters Heritage Council and the Washington Farm Bureau produced this past November was a solid start towards reframing the dialogue in a more forward-looking direction, and I agree with most of its conclusions.

Some folks on this forum seem to prefer to rant that this is all a rigged game, that hunters are outnumbered, and we're better served commenting amongst ourselves on Internet threads instead of participating in the decision-making process. I understand why you might feel that way, but we have to sit at the table to eat. Especially when we ARE outnumbered. The ranchers know this, and are participating heavily and gaining concessions through it, even from hardline groups like HSUS. Some hunters may not like wolves, conservation orgs, or Washington's wolf management policy, but we do ourselves a disservice if we refuse to participate in the decision-making process.

The next two WAG meetings are slated to focus on hunter concerns, including gaining greater acceptance of those concerns from other stakeholders and beginning to outline post-recovery management. I'll be there. I hope other hunters are as well.

-Chase Gunnell

[andersonjk4]

Thanks for reaching out to Francine, Jake. And for sharing this detailed information and thoughtful dialogue. It's refreshing compared to what some seem to prefer to share on this forum regarding such issues.

I personally don't relish how much the state is spending on her contract, especially with enforcement grossly underfunded and important programs for hunters and anglers on the chopping block. But having been deeply involved in this issue since 2014, I will go out on a limb and say we're lucky to have Francine working to bring diverse stakeholders to the table and moving forward. Including towards accepting lethal removals and eventually, some sort of proactive management through regulated hunts (something I fully support). Without Francine, I'm certain we'd be in a much worse and more expensive place right now, with radical out-of-state litigious groups like the Center for Biological Diversity holding greater influence.

I do very much believe that WDFW needs to do a better job of communicating exactly where this money is coming from, which is general fund appropriations from the legislature and special wildlife license plate revenue, NOT hunting and fishing license revenues. I've made that concern known to the Department, and hope it happens.

As a hunter, I've also been concerned about the lack of active and vocal sportsman's representative on the WAG, especially since Dan left. Nothing against the hunters still on that committee, but hunters need a more vocal voice, and some of the current hunting reps seem to want to stay quiet and allow other stakeholders to hold the spotlight.

The "white paper" that Washington Cattlemen’s Association, Cattle Producers of Washington, Washingtonians for Wildlife Conservation, Washington State Sheep Producers, Hunters Heritage Council and the Washington Farm Bureau produced this past November was a solid start towards reframing the dialogue in a more forward-looking direction, and I agree with most of its conclusions.

Some folks on this forum seem to prefer to rant that this is all a rigged game, that hunters are outnumbered, and we're better served commenting amongst ourselves on Internet threads instead of participating in the decision-making process. I understand why you might feel that way, but we have to sit at the table to eat. Especially when we ARE outnumbered. The ranchers know this, and are participating heavily and gaining concessions through it, even from hardline groups like HSUS. Some hunters may not like wolves, conservation orgs, or Washington's wolf management policy, but we do ourselves a disservice if we refuse to participate in the decision-making process.

The next two WAG meetings are slated to focus on hunter concerns, including gaining greater acceptance of those concerns from other stakeholders and beginning to outline post-recovery management. I'll be there. I hope other hunters are as well.

-Chase Gunnell

Extremely well stated.  Thank you for sharing your information.  This is exactly why I decided to email Francine in the first place and then ultimately shared the conversation here.   

[idahohuntr]

The wrong volunteer would do us more harm than good, a single voice against a bunch of others they tend to get overwhelmed and make concessions then later wonder what just happened in there   

We need a trained person supported by a big .org

While I agree the wrong person(s) can do more harm than good - I think a lot of folks are inflating what an advisory group composed of volunteers does...they have 0 authority to decide, agree to, or concede anything.  Its simply information gathering. 

[KFhunter]

The wrong volunteer would do us more harm than good, a single voice against a bunch of others they tend to get overwhelmed and make concessions then later wonder what just happened in there   

We need a trained person supported by a big .org

While I agree the wrong person(s) can do more harm than good - I think a lot of folks are inflating what an advisory group composed of volunteers does...they have 0 authority to decide, agree to, or concede anything.  Its simply information gathering.

    and this is all being printed out. 

[JimmyHoffa]

The wrong volunteer would do us more harm than good, a single voice against a bunch of others they tend to get overwhelmed and make concessions then later wonder what just happened in there   

We need a trained person supported by a big .org

While I agree the wrong person(s) can do more harm than good - I think a lot of folks are inflating what an advisory group composed of volunteers does...they have 0 authority to decide, agree to, or concede anything.  Its simply information gathering.

It delays the inevitable lawsuits from some of their handlers.

[Special T]

I don't want to put words in jackelope's mouth, but I think he is talking big picture.  Not just about the management of wolves in this state. 

The current role of Francine may be involving the wolf plan, but the larger theme of this thread is the need to increase and unify the voice of the hunting community.  I think that is what jackelope was getting at.

Its difficult to find a sportsmen's group who has a voice in this state. Already Member of RMEF mule deer foundation

Is this group worth supporting and sending in a donation?

http://huntersheritagecouncil.org/hhc-pac.html

I went to the Washington for Wildlife Conservation & Hunters Hertiage council Meeting In Ellensburg @Bushcraft could probably explain them better than I but I will give you my Impression. Both are an organization of Organizations. It appears to me to be the embodyment of differing organizations banding together to petition the state on mutual issues of concern. I meet some past WDFW employees, and some people that have thier pulse on the whos who in Olympia.
 Half the battle is knowing the players, knowing how the system works, whom are friendly to sports men (on both sides of the isle), and how to purwade those folks.

IMO is you want to do small part join an organization that belongs. If you are part of a sportsmen organization that is not a member petition them to find out about the WWC and Join. Www.w4wc.org

I think you can also join as an individual.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[huntnphool]

I don't want to put words in jackelope's mouth, but I think he is talking big picture.  Not just about the management of wolves in this state. 

The current role of Francine may be involving the wolf plan, but the larger theme of this thread is the need to increase and unify the voice of the hunting community.  I think that is what jackelope was getting at. 

Jackpot...

Well let's see how long they drag their feet in replacing the "hunters" voice.

Any suggestions for a volunteer to replace that person? I predict nobody will want to volunteer...wait for it!!!

 Text sent

[Skyvalhunter]

Text received