Anti propaganda

[Bullkllr]

https://wawildlifefirst.org/stop-the-2022-spring-bear-hunt/
At the bottom of the website theres a 509 area code phone number. You could always give them a call at 3am to talk about bears.

I tried to sign up for their email alert list, but I don't think I passed the vetting process for some reason. I should have used a fake name.

[Bullkllr]

This article was linked on the Washington Wildlife First website. The author is president of WWF.
It was an opinion piece published in the Spokesman Review in response to an earlier one written by Kim Thorburn regarding "hunting is under attack" in Washington.

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2021/jan/27/claire-loebs-davis-i-agree-commissioner-thorburn-c/
from
https://wawildlifefirst.org/news/

I found these quotes highly interesting, and highly contradictory of nearly every argument they are using to cancel spring bear. Here they were all about the science, experts (bios) and the law. Nearly everything I have read and heard re spring bear sounds like the opposite.

"Indeed, I suspect most hunters and nonhunters alike would agree that WFDW should respect science and follow the law. Unfortunately, it does neither."
and
"Will commissioners listen to their experts, examine science and follow the law? Or will they take Thorburn’s lead, disregarding facts and demonizing informed citizens as anti-hunting ideologues?"
Maybe its nothing, but it seems like a possible point to use in communicating with Commissioners or in the last round of public comments. 

[Timberstalker]

That article is full of lies.

[Bullkllr]

That article is full of lies.

Oh Absolutely! That's their whole platform: lie, lie, lie, and get enough easily-manipulated people to jump on their side. I was pointing out how they can't even be consistent with their lies.

The bad thing is they have traction and their efforts seem to be working. What will they attack next after spring bear?

[Chesapeake]

What stood out to me over the fact that a lawyer was so willing to slander and attack everyone in site
were these two.

That is nonsense, of course. Ethical hunting is not an “anti-hunting” ideology: One goal of the Game Management Plan that Thorburn is supposed to follow is to promote “high standards of hunter ethics and … principles of fair chase.”

It would be interesting to have her group define what it is they consider to be "Ethical hunting".

That is why my firm has sued WDFW, on behalf of both hunters and nonhunters.

What hunters is it that she is suing WDFW on behalf of? Maybe the different "Defund WDFW" folks?