WDFW Proposal to Eliminate Public Grazing Where Wolves Reside

[pianoman9701]

I find this outrageous. This is exactly what ranchers predicted 12 years ago as this wolf plan was pushed down our throats.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/news/wdfw-invites-public-input-grazing-department-lands

WDFW invites public input on grazing on department lands
Date
Sep 3, 2020
Contact
Paul Dahmer, 360-902-2480
Rachel Blomker, 360-701-3101

OLYMPIA -- The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) invites the public to submit written comments on how it proposes to manage livestock grazing on its lands.

The department uses grazing to achieve management goals consistent with its mission and strategic plan in ways that maintain the ecological integrity of the landscape. A new document will help guide the department as it works to put that priority into practice.

Department staff have developed the grazing guidance and management tools document that includes proposed grazing roles, management plan content, risk management, ecological integrity monitoring, wolf-livestock management, and a framework to evaluate potential new grazing.

Department staff will implement the grazing guidance through proposed rule-making, which clarifies when and under what conditions grazing is allowed on WDFW-managed lands.

WDFW is conducting an environmental review on the proposed changes in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Members of the public who would like to provide input on the substance of the grazing program guidance and management tools can do that through an online survey through Sept. 24, 2020 (https://wdfw.wa.gov/licenses/environmental/sepa/open-comments).

The public is also invited to provide feedback on the proposed regulations to implement the grazing guidance either through an online survey  https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DFWGRAZING20 or by emailing comments to rules.coordinator@dfw.wa.gov. WDFW must receive comments by 5 p.m. Sept. 24.

The Fish and Wildlife Commission will host a public hearing for the grazing rule update at their Oct. 22-24, 2020 meeting.

WDFW is the primary state agency tasked with preserving, protecting, and perpetuating fish, wildlife, and ecosystems, while providing sustainable fishing and hunting opportunities.

The department manages about a million acres of land, with 33 wildlife areas and nearly 500 water access areas around the state. These public lands help sustain wildlife habitat and public recreation opportunities for current and future generations.

Persons with disabilities who need to receive this information in an alternative format or who need reasonable accommodations to participate in WDFW-sponsored public meetings or other activities may contact Dolores Noyes by phone (360-902-2349), TTY (360-902-2207), or email (dolores.noyes@dfw.wa.gov). For more information, see https://wdfw.wa.gov/accessibility/requests-accommodation.

[pianoman9701]

Dear Sir/Madam,

Passing a rule which prohibits cattle grazing on public land where wolves are found is crazy, especially during a time when so many industries are struggling to survive. The cattle industry helps our state’s economy and ecology. Grazing reduces the risk and intensity of wildfires. Our beef industry is extremely important and employs tens of thousands of people statewide. Blocking off up to a million acres of land would cripple that industry and drive many out of business. They didn’t ask for the wolves, in fact, they strongly opposed their introduction for just this reason.

Wolves are thriving in WA. Unfortunately for those who heralded their arrival as a big accomplishment, the entire program has been beleaguered with problems, ranging from the wolves in close proximity to populated areas, to parasites which transfer to humans because the USFWS didn’t do their job when they transplanted them into the GYA. In addition, poor insight and planning by the WDFW and the USFWS neglected to see the impact that rapid wolf population growth would have on the NE corner of our state. If wolves belong here at all, they should be limited to remote, wilderness-type areas.

The original wolf plan paints a rosy picture of the balance of nature and low impact to humans. If you pass this rule, you’ll be deviating from the original plan to suit the wishes of those who oppose the cattle industry. You’ve already seen what these extremists have done on the WAG. Wake up to what’s happening and protect working families in WA. This is not the time in our economic history to wipe out entire industries. Please reconsider and trash this reckless and foolish proposal.
Pianoman

[lastmk8]

Well stated pianoman.

[HighCountryHunter88]

so am i reading this right that its pushing this on only WDFW lands?

[timberfaller]

The "hidden agenda" from the 1970's is not so hidden any more!!   More "mis-management" from a government agency controlled by liberals/socialist eco-freaks!

Brush busters is what describes cattle on their ranges they get to inhabit.  To bad highly educated individuals can't grasp that!  But then "those" laughed at the WSCA back then when they said in Spokane, "Kick us off the open ranges and the next thing you will know and see, is the billows of smoke pouring into the sky!"

Me thinks they were right!!  Total mis-management of our resources by government bureaucrats and their puppet masters!!

[idahohuntr]

I think folks should actually read what WDFW wrote.  The OP's title and associated comment letter are extremely misleading.  The WDFW describes when and where grazing is used for the benefit of wildlife and habitat on lands they manage and I see nothing that suggests grazing will not continue to be a tool they use. 

WDFW seeks to maintain maximum flexibility to meet wolf recovery goals and to continue to permit viable grazing in areas potentially used by wolves.

[pianoman9701]

so am i reading this right that its pushing this on only WDFW lands?

That's where they're starting, yes. Once they get that through, it'll be DNR, then BLM. Like gun control, controls on cattle ranchers only go in one direction...to the left from people sworn to end beef production in the US.

[Utah]

Your every lisence fee pays their wage.  They work for you.  Fkm

[WAcoyotehunter]

I think folks should actually read what WDFW wrote.  The OP's title and associated comment letter are extremely misleading.  The WDFW describes when and where grazing is used for the benefit of wildlife and habitat on lands they manage and I see nothing that suggests grazing will not continue to be a tool they use. 

WDFW seeks to maintain maximum flexibility to meet wolf recovery goals and to continue to permit viable grazing in areas potentially used by wolves.

That's what I saw too.  I'm trying to figure out how this is a wolf issue? How much grazing does wdfw permit?

[Boss .300 winmag]

🤔

[buckfvr]

Some people are still able to accept the word of wdfw both spoken and in writing.  Others acceptance ranges from skepticism to complete lack of trust.  What they say and write usually differs from what they otherwise do and mean.

The longer you are able to observe wdfw actions, the less likely you may be to believe/trust.

I started paying attention in the 70's and find myself highly unlikely to believe/trust.  The good old days are LONG gone and never to return.  Politics and a politically charged wdfw have ruined this state and put it on a collision course with wildlife protection as the numbers continue to decline.  If this continues, it'll be over before you can even imagine it.

[Boss .300 winmag]

Some people are still able to accept the word of wdfw both spoken and in writing.  Others acceptance ranges from skepticism to complete lack of trust.  What they say and write usually differs from what they otherwise do and mean.

The longer you are able to observe wdfw actions, the less likely you may be to believe/trust.

I started paying attention in the 70's and find myself highly unlikely to believe/trust.  The good old days are LONG gone and never to return.  Politics and a politically charged wdfw have ruined this state and put it on a collision course with wildlife protection as the numbers continue to decline.  If this continues, it'll be over before you can even imagine it.

 

[bigtex]

so am i reading this right that its pushing this on only WDFW lands?

That's where they're starting, yes. Once they get that through, it'll be DNR, then BLM. Like gun control, controls on cattle ranchers only go in one direction...to the left from people sworn to end beef production in the US.

Sorry but "they" (WDFW) can only control grazing on WDFW lands.

WDFW has 1,000,000 acres under it's control as "Wildlife Areas", only 110,000 acres are actively grazed.

[Caseyd]

so am i reading this right that its pushing this on only WDFW lands?

That's where they're starting, yes. Once they get that through, it'll be DNR, then BLM. Like gun control, controls on cattle ranchers only go in one direction...to the left from people sworn to end beef production in the US.

Sorry but "they" (WDFW) can only control grazing on WDFW lands.

WDFW has 1,000,000 acres under it's control as "Wildlife Areas", only 110,000 acres are actively grazed.

What gets cut because  the loss of revenue from contracts?

[bigtex]

so am i reading this right that its pushing this on only WDFW lands?

That's where they're starting, yes. Once they get that through, it'll be DNR, then BLM. Like gun control, controls on cattle ranchers only go in one direction...to the left from people sworn to end beef production in the US.

Sorry but "they" (WDFW) can only control grazing on WDFW lands.

WDFW has 1,000,000 acres under it's control as "Wildlife Areas", only 110,000 acres are actively grazed.

What gets cut because  the loss of revenue from contracts?

From the 50 grazers? It's not a money maker for WDFW. Typically, WDFW actually loses money administering the grazing program, but the upside is the fuel reduction in terms of potential wildfires.