I spoke before the commission yesterday

[Shooter4]

The majority of that board is a bunch of scumbags trying to reinvent the wheel towards anti hunting.

[saylean]

I listened live to your statement and said outloud to myself, good for you. I couldn’t agree more. While not necessarily constructive (of course what is with those people), it certainly rang true to me.

[X-Force]

Does the commission have a legal obligation to sit and listen to public comment? I’m just wondering with 2 walking out as soon as someone they obviously distain was set to speak.

[Special T]

Does the commission have a legal obligation to sit and listen to public comment? I’m just wondering with 2 walking out as soon as someone they obviously distain was set to speak.

No, but it shows that the pressure is cracking them.  You can tell that the comments about them being disingenuous, we don't trust them and they are liners pissed them off. Perhaps more of the We don't trust you, and you are disingenuous comments are the best path forward. We won't move forward because they are not honest brokers in the conversation..

[HillHound]

Does the commission have a legal obligation to sit and listen to public comment? I’m just wondering with 2 walking out as soon as someone they obviously distain was set to speak.

I sure think they have an obligation to listen to our comments. Because it’s their job. That’s why they were appointed in that position. If they can’t listen and discuss the topic at hand they need to forfeit their position. Just like with spring bear with Lorna and her crazy friends refused to even discuss it again. And they don’t want us bringing up spring bear again. Oh of course because they realize how wrong they were there so they wanted to sweep it under the rug before anybody notices. Man I hope some of these commissioners personally pay for their decisions that are causing overpopulation of predators like many of us who had no say will be. Hopefully they remember when that cougar or bear tears the guts out of their golden doodle in their yard that that cougar really was there before and he really does deserve to be able to eat their dogs and they really should just sit there and watch and enjoy the awesome nature sightseeing opportunity they have right in their yard. Maybe they could get a cute new small dog each week that way if that poor cougar happens to be hungry It could just stop by their yard and eat another. Shoot they put them above everything they probably wouldn’t be opposed to feeding a couple grandkids to them. Because again after all the animals do have more rights than us along with people who have no interest or interaction or use for the animals also have more rights and say than us apparently. Having these wackos on our game commission is the same as having the local sentcy or Tupperware salesperson become the county’s building inspector. These people have no personal knowledge of anything they are talking about. All that they have is a combined hate for anybody and everybody that hunts. They are liars and they will do anything to get their way.

[AKBowman]

I took a few hours off and attended the meeting from about 11:30 to lunch break then spoke in the first round of public comments coming out of lunch break. I agree with the OP though it is hard to come up with anything constructive to say in 2 minutes.

A couple things to note:

1. several members of the commission didn’t know what a multi-season permit was, what CWD is and or why the WDFW would incentive hunters to submit testing for CWD.

2. One of the commissioners, I believe it was Barbara Baker, told a story immediately leading out of lunch break. She told a story of her recent trip to Africa with the valuable lessons she learned of conservation while on the trip. She headed warning that we (North America) are “way behind” on conservation as compared to the places she visited in Africa. In fact, she stated, they are so far ahead of us they have already “banned hunting”.

3. The 2nd speaker was a pro-hunter (young guy) who brought up the point that at least 5 of the appointed commissioners have never been taken hunter education. How can you make educated decisions about subjects you have zero first hand experience with?

Let’s not mince words here. A vast majority of these people are straight up anti-hunting.

I was the one who spoke on the Wild Harvest Initiative which is the first real study to put tangible subjective values to the amount of meals provided each year, in each state from hunting. I tried to emphasize that this is a legit project lead by science and done in conjunction with state agencies involved. This could be a tool they could use to promote the value of wildlife as a sustainable resource while using their platform to help solve a hunger issue we see in this country. 

A big part of what I talked about is the project shows 93% of hunters share their harvest with on average of 3 other people within their household. 74% of hunters shared their harvest with on average of 4 people outside their household. My point was that even if only 2% of the population hunts it’s likely that up to 20% (or more) of the population benefits from the food provided. It’s not 2% of the population in WA State that hunts and 98% are against hunting. I think I made mention that recent polls show 70% of people are in favor of hunting as way of obtaining food.

I also spoke about the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and tried to emphasize that is NOT broken. In fact it is nearly solely responsible for the national recovery of deer, elk, bison, Turkey, waterfowl and more.

https://thewildharvestinitiative.com/

[ducks4days]

2. One of the commissioners, I believe it was Barbara Baker, told a story immediately leading out of lunch break. She told a story of her recent trip to Africa with the valuable lessons she learned of conservation while on the trip. She headed warning that we (North America) are “way behind” on conservation as compared to the places she visited in Africa. In fact, she stated, they are so far ahead of us they have already “banned hunting”.

They want a return to colonialism and a noble/aristocrat class who have a sole right to the land and animals on it. This is the only way I can interpret this which makes sense.

[MADMAX]

Thank you to all who participated in person
I hope any who care at least send an email to the entire commission

[MADMAX]

2. One of the commissioners, I believe it was Barbara Baker, told a story immediately leading out of lunch break. She told a story of her recent trip to Africa with the valuable lessons she learned of conservation while on the trip. She headed warning that we (North America) are “way behind” on conservation as compared to the places she visited in Africa. In fact, she stated, they are so far ahead of us they have already “banned hunting”.

They want a return to colonialism and a noble/aristocrat class who have a sole right to the land and animals on it. This is the only way I can interpret this which makes sense.

They want control
And ultimately our guns

[hunter399]

I took a few hours off and attended the meeting from about 11:30 to lunch break then spoke in the first round of public comments coming out of lunch break. I agree with the OP though it is hard to come up with anything constructive to say in 2 minutes.

A couple things to note:

1. several members of the commission didn’t know what a multi-season permit was, what CWD is and or why the WDFW would incentive hunters to submit testing for CWD.

2. One of the commissioners, I believe it was Barbara Baker, told a story immediately leading out of lunch break. She told a story of her recent trip to Africa with the valuable lessons she learned of conservation while on the trip. She headed warning that we (North America) are “way behind” on conservation as compared to the places she visited in Africa. In fact, she stated, they are so far ahead of us they have already “banned hunting”.

3. The 2nd speaker was a pro-hunter (young guy) who brought up the point that at least 5 of the appointed commissioners have never been taken hunter education. How can you make educated decisions about subjects you have zero first hand experience with?

Let’s not mince words here. A vast majority of these people are straight up anti-hunting.

I was the one who spoke on the Wild Harvest Initiative which is the first real study to put tangible subjective values to the amount of meals provided each year, in each state from hunting. I tried to emphasize that this is a legit project lead by science and done in conjunction with state agencies involved. This could be a tool they could use to promote the value of wildlife as a sustainable resource while using their platform to help solve a hunger issue we see in this country. 

A big part of what I talked about is the project shows 93% of hunters share their harvest with on average of 3 other people within their household. 74% of hunters shared their harvest with on average of 4 people outside their household. My point was that even if only 2% of the population hunts it’s likely that up to 20% (or more) of the population benefits from the food provided. It’s not 2% of the population in WA State that hunts and 98% are against hunting. I think I made mention that recent polls show 70% of people are in favor of hunting as way of obtaining food.

I also spoke about the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and tried to emphasize that is NOT broken. In fact it is nearly solely responsible for the national recovery of deer, elk, bison, Turkey, waterfowl and more.

https://thewildharvestinitiative.com/

Number 2 on your list is so funny to me.
And explains alot about Barbara baker.
Cause I believe without trophy hunting dollars poachers will destroy more wildlife then they will protect.
In a country such as Africa ,you can't ban hunting and think poachers won't take over.
Almost every animal that's endangered is cause of poachers.
You gotta be stupid to think that's gonna work out.

Funny thing about our Commission is ,Who do you think paid for conservation of all the animals you seen in the animal preserve.
Or all the conservation and science up to this point in Washington.
Just WOW.

Just keep taking our money,and keep trying to limit opportunities,or ban hunting.
Your just hurting our wildlife even more ,by limiting the amount of funding that goes to support the same animals you think your protecting.
Spring bear is a perfect example.
WDFW is not using spring bear money

[pianoman9701]

Thank you for attending and speaking out. I wanted to go and couldn't because of a health issue I've been dealing with for a month. I did send my comments to the commission but I would imagine that only 4 of the commissioners would have taken the time to read them.

Good job on the podium for us. Thank you! 

[Ridgerunner]

Thank you to all who have taken the time to get involved, speak out at meetings and write the commissioners.  It's needed for sure even if it going to fall on death ears. 

The latest observations noted in this thread are not surprising but literally make me want to throw up that this commission has authority over the hunting in this state.  These individuals have no business making decisions about things they obviously know next to nothing on. 

That being said the realist in me can't help but feel like the nails are in the coffin already, and now they are just going to slowly pound them in one by one over the coming decades till hunting in this state is a thing of the past. 

[pianoman9701]

Don't throw in the towel just yet. The lawsuit v. Inslee and the activists has been filed and is going forward.

[luvmystang67]

Its music to my ears that they're "tired of hearing about Spring bear".

I hope they get REALLY tired of hearing about it.

Keep it up, thanks for doing what you did!

People can only take so much, especially when they know they're wrong.  Keep up the pressure.

[GOcougsHunter]

Its music to my ears that they're "tired of hearing about Spring bear".

I hope they get REALLY tired of hearing about it.

Keep it up, thanks for doing what you did!

People can only take so much, especially when they know they're wrong.  Keep up the pressure.

agree.  What I get tired of hearing is "only 2% of Washingtonians hunt.  We need to account for the other 98% in our decision making"   I have said this before, every one of these Washington boards, oversight committees, regulators etc who manage the niche departments within the state are under the wrong assumption/fallacy that the totality of the population needs to drive decision making.  The most impacted user group needs to have the biggest say and influence.  Period.  WSDOT has a rules board for aviation and public airfields.  Could you imagine if it was staffed with non pilots who drove an agenda based on input from the entire state where most folks have no skin in the game?  That is what this commission is doing.