WDFW Predator Lawsuit

[HighCountryHunter88]

Good deal, hoping it works out.

All WDFW would have to do is allow "us" to bait bear, run hounds and use leg hold traps again. Sportsmen would also gladly shoot seals, cormorants etc. also-free of charge, but highly doubt that sensible route would ever be used again 

except wdfw doesnt have the authority to grant us those options, it was voted on not a decision made by wdfw.

[singleshot12]

If they don't have the authority then we need a dept. that works for us and the wildlife again..

The city folks who don't hunt and fish and buy a license should have no say in the matter! just sayin

[STIKNSTRINGBOW]

Good deal, hoping it works out.

All WDFW would have to do is allow "us" to bait bear, run hounds and use leg hold traps again. Sportsmen would also gladly shoot seals, cormorants etc. also-free of charge, but highly doubt that sensible route would ever be used again 

except wdfw doesnt have the authority to grant us those options, it was voted on not a decision made by wdfw.

They were/are given the ability to provide special permits under exemptions in the RCW

[Jonathan_S]

What I going to be needed for resources? Form letters, money, people showing up?

[Oh Mah]

The biggest thing that would help is  WDFW themselves getting behind the hunters on this issue.At this time they are just doing as the Gov. and the masses both of which have no clue.

A lawsuit like this will (if successful) force the dept. into either doing something about the predators themselves or forcing them to allow hunters to do it in a more successful way.Whether that be more ways *loosening the restrictions), longer periods, or more quota would be the question.

[Skyvalhunter]

This is exciting news for Washington hunters, a lawsuit is planned to have the court force WDFW to properly manage predators so balanced management will once again occur in Washington. It has become painfully obvious that nothing short of a court order will result in predator management in Washington. This news comes from a capable and reliable source of which will be known when the lawsuit happens this spring.   

I certainly hope that it works, we know that the leaf licker groups have done there share of lawsuits.

[BULLBLASTER]

Good deal, hoping it works out.

All WDFW would have to do is allow "us" to bait bear, run hounds and use leg hold traps again. Sportsmen would also gladly shoot seals, cormorants etc. also-free of charge, but highly doubt that sensible route would ever be used again 

except wdfw doesnt have the authority to grant us those options, it was voted on not a decision made by wdfw.

They were/are given the ability to provide special permits under exemptions in the RCW

Also legislature can change the rcw to allow it. Wdfw could have some major pull with leg if they would provide support for it and biology to support it also. 

[KFhunter]

The biggest thing that would help is  WDFW themselves getting behind the hunters on this issue.At this time they are just doing as the Gov. and the masses both of which have no clue.

A lawsuit like this will (if successful) force the dept. into either doing something about the predators themselves or forcing them to allow hunters to do it in a more successful way.Whether that be more ways *loosening the restrictions), longer periods, or more quota would be the question.

Even a loss would be a win as it would highlight a lot of issues at the department and put it in the spotlight, maybe even kick off a state wide if not national conversation.

If nothing else it's going to be a whirlwind, all the so called "conservation" groups, will be sending in gobs of money to hire big time lawyers to fight it. 

[WSU]

These seems like a very uphill battle to me.  The court will defer to WDFW's "expertise" on management issues.  Unless you can show that they have no reasonable basis for what they are doing, exactly what is the challenge going to be?

[KFhunter]

Good deal, hoping it works out.

All WDFW would have to do is allow "us" to bait bear, run hounds and use leg hold traps again. Sportsmen would also gladly shoot seals, cormorants etc. also-free of charge, but highly doubt that sensible route would ever be used again 

except wdfw doesnt have the authority to grant us those options, it was voted on not a decision made by wdfw.

They were/are given the ability to provide special permits under exemptions in the RCW

Also legislature can change the rcw to allow it. Wdfw could have some major pull with leg if they would provide support for it and biology to support it also. 

 


I sure as heck ain't paying $30 for vehicle tags if you'all remember how long that voter initiative lasted.
https://ballotpedia.org/Washington_License_Tab_Fees,_Initiative_776_(2002)

now they're doing it again ($30 car tabs) because the 2002 initiative didn't stick around long. 

The hounds,baiting, foothold traps initiative needs to go away, there just isn't an incentive to get rid of it, unlike I-776

[WSU]

The biggest thing that would help is  WDFW themselves getting behind the hunters on this issue.At this time they are just doing as the Gov. and the masses both of which have no clue.

A lawsuit like this will (if successful) force the dept. into either doing something about the predators themselves or forcing them to allow hunters to do it in a more successful way.Whether that be more ways *loosening the restrictions), longer periods, or more quota would be the question.

Even a loss would be a win as it would highlight a lot of issues at the department and put it in the spotlight, maybe even kick off a state wide if not national conversation.

If nothing else it's going to be a whirlwind, all the so called "conservation" groups, will be sending in gobs of money to hire big time lawyers to fight it.

A loss may very well not be a win and could damage future efforts.  WDFW is averse to lawsuits, but is much more likely to act in the face of a potential lawsuit when they think, or in this case know, that they'll win.  If they've already won once, they have no reason to avoid the court battle.

[KFhunter]

The biggest thing that would help is  WDFW themselves getting behind the hunters on this issue.At this time they are just doing as the Gov. and the masses both of which have no clue.

A lawsuit like this will (if successful) force the dept. into either doing something about the predators themselves or forcing them to allow hunters to do it in a more successful way.Whether that be more ways *loosening the restrictions), longer periods, or more quota would be the question.

Even a loss would be a win as it would highlight a lot of issues at the department and put it in the spotlight, maybe even kick off a state wide if not national conversation.

If nothing else it's going to be a whirlwind, all the so called "conservation" groups, will be sending in gobs of money to hire big time lawyers to fight it.

A loss may very well not be a win and could damage future efforts.  WDFW is averse to lawsuits, but is much more likely to act in the face of a potential lawsuit when they think, or in this case know, that they'll win.  If they've already won once, they have no reason to avoid the court battle.

What's to loose and how could it get (much) worse?  IMO the risk of 'things getting worse' isn't high enough of a risk to not move forward with the chance at improvement.

I trust your knowledge in these matters so please if you would enlighten us on how you see things might get worse?  I can see a budget strain if a court mandates a new predator/prey study but one is already ongoing now, maybe with the courts involvement it might not be skewed one side or the other like the WSU disgraced professor study. 

[WSU]

At this point I'd be speculating without know what the basis of the lawsuit is.  Whether it would truly make things worse or not I don't know.  I'd have to know what law WDFW is supposedly violating and why.

But, if there is some issue they are afraid that they may potentially get sued over, they act with more caution if they think it may have merit.  Once they are confident they will win, they will forge ahead even in the face of threatened litigation. 

[kellama2001]

Tagging along. Hope something positive comes of this!

[KFhunter]

One thing I would like is WDFW to toss out any and all policy decisions based on Weilgus's study's while at WSU.   

He's been found to be biased and untruthful, manipulating studies to protect predators.   WDFW implemented many policies regarding predators based on WSU large carnivore study's from WSU. 

Here is a letter from WSU apologizing for Weilgus whom was later fired from WSU, yet his flawed study's continue to to hold sway at WDFW. 

https://news.wsu.edu/2016/08/31/wsu-issues-statement-clarifying-comments-profanity-peak-wolf-pack/

One example would be our Cougar plan, all based on Weilgus and his acolytes. 
https://news.wsu.edu/2012/09/25/wsu-research-results-in-new-management-plan/


I do not think it would be hard to show unprofessional bias in these studies to the court, especially when WSU itself has apologized for it.