Are Animal-Rights Activists Hijacking Our Wildlife Commissions?

[wolfbait]

https://www.outdoorlife.com/conservation/animal-rights-wildlife-commission-takeover-podcast/?utm_term=ODL%20-%20110623&utm_campaign=Outdoor%20Life_Newsletter_Actives&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email

[HUNTIN4SIX]

https://www.outdoorlife.com/conservation/animal-rights-wildlife-commission-takeover-podcast/?utm_term=ODL%20-%20110623&utm_campaign=Outdoor%20Life_Newsletter_Actives&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email

To answer your question....YES, for many years now!

[KNOPHISH]

To counter act the game management by ballot box we need to do the same to shut down in its tracks. A petition that makes hunting a right. A petition that absolutely no game management by ballot box can be legal. Worded correctly they may have a chance. A lawsuit against commission for Not following science. The commissions new conservation policy can not be legal if not following science proved in court.

[buckfvr]

Not just the commission, the entirety of wdfw.

[timberfaller]

Its been the MO of all the extremest eco-freaks since the late 70's.  You don't hear much from the Earth First-ers or Green Peace anymore, why?  They figured out that by getting employed by the government, they would get into the decision making roles!!!   Last account I read, the USFS employee's union was 96% Eco-terrist!  Wolfbait can attest to that!!

Now decades later, you don't have to look very far to find them out!!   The Center of Biodiversity is now the leading group of nut-case's!!  And government does their bidding!!  After all, they only exist by grants!! 

[steeleywhopper]

Not just the commission, the entirety of wdfw.

This!

[Bendejo]

Not just the commission, the entirety of wdfw.

Can you Cliff note a couple of data points so I can research this?

[andersonjk4]

Not just the commission, the entirety of wdfw.

Can you Cliff note a couple of data points so I can research this?

Dig into the organization Washington Wildlife First and its creator Claire Davis.  She created the organization for the purpose of changing the WDFW and the commission from top to bottom. 

Here is a podcast she was on that really gives an insight into the WWF operations and goals.  Its a tough listen, but you have to know what the other side is up to.

https://thewolfconnection.buzzsprout.com/1081496/13553760

[bigtex]

To counter act the game management by ballot box we need to do the same to shut down in its tracks. A petition that makes hunting a right. A petition that absolutely no game management by ballot box can be legal. Worded correctly they may have a chance. A lawsuit against commission for Not following science. The commissions new conservation policy can not be legal if not following science proved in court.

What do you mean by petition? You mean initiative? If you do, it seems weird to have an initiative to make it unlawful to have an itiative regarding wildlife management.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[chukarchaser]

What method would you suggest Big Tex?  Also any chance you could jump in and offer your insight on the corner crossing thread.  It would be much appreciated

[bigtex]

What method would you suggest Big Tex?  Also any chance you could jump in and offer your insight on the corner crossing thread.  It would be much appreciated

Already provided input on the corner crossing.

Regarding this thread. I honestly think we've missed our opportunity by decades perhaps. Does anybody really think a citizenry that voted 30ish years ago to ban bear baiting, hound hunting, and most trapping is now going to approve an initiative that cements hunting in the state constitution? I dont see it happening, the state has only gotten bluer since those bear baiting and trapping votes.

On the legislature side you used to have a few hard-core hunting democrats who would side with the Republicans on hunting and firearms issues. Those individuals are now gone, and in most instances replaced by more liberal individuals who don't hunt.

I put more faith in the legislative process than the citizen initiative process. But, we need to get more likeminded people in the legislature. It's amazing how many legislative positions really come down to a couple hundred or thousand votes, how many people in those districts didn't vote? My district in the suburbs went from essentially a swing district to a democrat only district for the past 10 or so years, those Republicans are still here, they're not voting.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Humptulips]

What method would you suggest Big Tex?  Also any chance you could jump in and offer your insight on the corner crossing thread.  It would be much appreciated

Already provided input on the corner crossing.

Regarding this thread. I honestly think we've missed our opportunity by decades perhaps. Does anybody really think a citizenry that voted 30ish years ago to ban bear baiting, hound hunting, and most trapping is now going to approve an initiative that cements hunting in the state constitution? I dont see it happening, the state has only gotten bluer since those bear baiting and trapping votes.

On the legislature side you used to have a few hard-core hunting democrats who would side with the Republicans on hunting and firearms issues. Those individuals are now gone, and in most instances replaced by more liberal individuals who don't hunt.

I put more faith in the legislative process than the citizen initiative process. But, we need to get more likeminded people in the legislature. It's amazing how many legislative positions really come down to a couple hundred or thousand votes, how many people in those districts didn't vote? My district in the suburbs went from essentially a swing district to a democrat only district for the past 10 or so years, those Republicans are still here, they're not voting.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Truth being spoken here!

[Tbar]

What method would you suggest Big Tex?  Also any chance you could jump in and offer your insight on the corner crossing thread.  It would be much appreciated

Already provided input on the corner crossing.

Regarding this thread. I honestly think we've missed our opportunity by decades perhaps. Does anybody really think a citizenry that voted 30ish years ago to ban bear baiting, hound hunting, and most trapping is now going to approve an initiative that cements hunting in the state constitution? I dont see it happening, the state has only gotten bluer since those bear baiting and trapping votes.

On the legislature side you used to have a few hard-core hunting democrats who would side with the Republicans on hunting and firearms issues. Those individuals are now gone, and in most instances replaced by more liberal individuals who don't hunt.

I put more faith in the legislative process than the citizen initiative process. But, we need to get more likeminded people in the legislature. It's amazing how many legislative positions really come down to a couple hundred or thousand votes, how many people in those districts didn't vote? My district in the suburbs went from essentially a swing district to a democrat only district for the past 10 or so years, those Republicans are still here, they're not voting.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Agreed.  I don't think sportsman realized what was lost in the 19th.  He and others provided 20 years of coverage that few realize because they stayed ahead for the most part. Both consumptive use as well as 2a protection.  The leg is worse without him. 

[bigtex]

What method would you suggest Big Tex?  Also any chance you could jump in and offer your insight on the corner crossing thread.  It would be much appreciated

Already provided input on the corner crossing.

Regarding this thread. I honestly think we've missed our opportunity by decades perhaps. Does anybody really think a citizenry that voted 30ish years ago to ban bear baiting, hound hunting, and most trapping is now going to approve an initiative that cements hunting in the state constitution? I dont see it happening, the state has only gotten bluer since those bear baiting and trapping votes.

On the legislature side you used to have a few hard-core hunting democrats who would side with the Republicans on hunting and firearms issues. Those individuals are now gone, and in most instances replaced by more liberal individuals who don't hunt.

I put more faith in the legislative process than the citizen initiative process. But, we need to get more likeminded people in the legislature. It's amazing how many legislative positions really come down to a couple hundred or thousand votes, how many people in those districts didn't vote? My district in the suburbs went from essentially a swing district to a democrat only district for the past 10 or so years, those Republicans are still here, they're not voting.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Agreed.  I don't think sportsman realized what was lost in the 19th.  He and others provided 20 years of coverage that few realize because they stayed ahead for the most part. Both consumptive use as well as 2a protection.  The leg is worse without him. 

Takko and Blake are two that come to mind. Yes they're Democrats, but are pro-hunting, pro-gun, etc. We lost a great Natural Resource Commitee Chair in Blake and a great committee member in Takko. Blake was replaced as Chair by another Dem who sponsored 0 hunting related bills this year and has an A plus rating from the Alliance for Gun Responsibility. Takko and Blake had 80-100% ratings by the NRA. Know any other dem with such rating? There aren't any.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Tbar]

What method would you suggest Big Tex?  Also any chance you could jump in and offer your insight on the corner crossing thread.  It would be much appreciated

Already provided input on the corner crossing.

Regarding this thread. I honestly think we've missed our opportunity by decades perhaps. Does anybody really think a citizenry that voted 30ish years ago to ban bear baiting, hound hunting, and most trapping is now going to approve an initiative that cements hunting in the state constitution? I dont see it happening, the state has only gotten bluer since those bear baiting and trapping votes.

On the legislature side you used to have a few hard-core hunting democrats who would side with the Republicans on hunting and firearms issues. Those individuals are now gone, and in most instances replaced by more liberal individuals who don't hunt.

I put more faith in the legislative process than the citizen initiative process. But, we need to get more likeminded people in the legislature. It's amazing how many legislative positions really come down to a couple hundred or thousand votes, how many people in those districts didn't vote? My district in the suburbs went from essentially a swing district to a democrat only district for the past 10 or so years, those Republicans are still here, they're not voting.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Agreed.  I don't think sportsman realized what was lost in the 19th.  He and others provided 20 years of coverage that few realize because they stayed ahead for the most part. Both consumptive use as well as 2a protection.  The leg is worse without him. 

Takko and Blake are two that come to mind. Yes they're Democrats, but are pro-hunting, pro-gun, etc. We lost a great Natural Resource Commitee Chair in Blake and a great committee member in Takko. Blake was replaced as Chair by another Dem who sponsored 0 hunting related bills this year and has an A plus rating from the Alliance for Gun Responsibility. Takko and Blake had 80-100% ratings by the NRA. Know any other dem with such rating? There aren't any.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

What amazes me is how a support of commercial may have been the dagger and the in the antis needed, a self inflicted dagger.  It's all under attack now. 

[KNOPHISH]

To counter act the game management by ballot box we need to do the same to shut down in its tracks. A petition that makes hunting a right. A petition that absolutely no game management by ballot box can be legal. Worded correctly they may have a chance. A lawsuit against commission for Not following science. The commissions new conservation policy can not be legal if not following science proved in court.

What do you mean by petition? You mean initiative? If you do, it seems weird to have an initiative to make it unlawful to have an itiative regarding wildlife management.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Yes I guess they are initiatives but shouldn’t be legal for game mgmt, science not feelings. But it is a long shot. Just think there needs to be a law against it.

[chukarchaser]

Thanks Big Tex for a very well thought out reosne to my questions.  .

[lokidog]

To counter act the game management by ballot box we need to do the same to shut down in its tracks. A petition that makes hunting a right. A petition that absolutely no game management by ballot box can be legal. Worded correctly they may have a chance. A lawsuit against commission for Not following science. The commissions new conservation policy can not be legal if not following science proved in court.

What do you mean by petition? You mean initiative? If you do, it seems weird to have an initiative to make it unlawful to have an itiative regarding wildlife management.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Not really, the Initiative would say wildlife management is done by scientifically accredited processes, not public opinion. 

[Wad-Cutter]

I wonder if this might do the trick.  We get an initiative on the ballot that isn't so much about hunting policy per se, but that takes commission appointments out of the hands of the governor, and into the hands of the voters (by region).  In other words, the commission becomes an elected body, each representing their particular region (based on geography, not population).  I THINK the governor's power to appoint commissioners is a matter of statutory law, not something enshrined in the State constitution, which I THINK means it is something that can be changed via the initiative process.  If it's more an issue about representing local people's interests, rather than specifically about individual hunting policies or a right to vote, it might stand a better chance of passing.  As I understand it, a constitutional amendment our State has to go through the legislature at some point, which means a "right to hunt" amendment would be DOA.  I am not a lawyer, so would love to hear thoughts about that from someone smarter than me.