A different approach to dealing with the WDFW Commission?

[Blacktail Sniper]

I wanted to put this in its own thread so it didn't get lost or pollute the other threads, and I hope it can stay non-political so it doesn't get moved or locked.

But have any of those activatly opposing the Commission ever considered a different approach than what has already been tried?

Specifically, I am thinking of working on getting the regulatory power removed from the Commission and put back directly under WDFW?

Leave the Commission in place as advisors olny, or disband completely, but either way, take away their power to set rules & regulations in any and all form.

If they (the Commission) are not able to actually make, change, or in anyway control the rules, seasons, harvest, etc., and it fell back under WDFW proper where biologists and such would be the ones that have the final say, then the Commission would have no way to forward any type of personal or political adgenda as it seems they are currently doing unchecked.

My guess is it would be an uphill battle and not an easy task, maybe even requiring more legal action/suits filed, but that may be the better path than what is/has been done so far...

[addicted1]

Makes sense to me

[Special T]

The WDFW director used to be appointed by the governor  and worked for him. Referendum 45 created the commission. It's checks and balances mostly worked until we became a 1 party state and those check and balances no longer worked.

I'm not sure the options we could come up with could be made to happen politically.  I also think this dysfunctional commission is on purpose to either abolish referendum 45 and have it under the govenors control, or to just destroy the department like California.

[WSU]

The idea has been batted around. Even if you got the law changed, you’d have inslee or Ferguson appointing the director.

[hughjorgan]

The idea has been batted around. Even if you got the law changed, you’d have inslee or Ferguson appointing the director.

Who said Ferguson is going to be our next governor?

https://mynorthwest.com/3939633/polling-reichert-ahead-ferguson-wa-governor-race/

I like the OP idea, but don’t know how you’re going to get it passed. Maybe voter initiative?

[Slamadoo]

Fight fire with fire.

Lawsuits and litigation.

[WSU]

The idea has been batted around. Even if you got the law changed, you’d have inslee or Ferguson appointing the director.

Who said Ferguson is going to be our next governor?

https://mynorthwest.com/3939633/polling-reichert-ahead-ferguson-wa-governor-race/

I like the OP idea, but don’t know how you’re going to get it passed. Maybe voter initiative?

That would be great. But my point still stands. We will have a very liberal governor most of the time.

[Slamadoo]

Question: How many commissioners voted for the spring bear petition last week?

Question: Why have we not filed suite against the commission yet for their spring bear decision? They clearly knew they had enough bears to keep the hunt. They violated their own mandates to maximize recreational opportunities. There are definitely individuals out there with standing in this matter. Individuals who have purchased points and invested time and have now lost out on that opportunity due to the unwarranted actions of the commission.

Even more than time and money, individuals have lost out on experiences of cultural value to them due to the actions of the commission. Can you ever replace a hunt or trip with a loved one that you were denied for frivolous reasons? Arbitrary and illegal government action?

We need to stop begging them to do the right thing when we know they won't. We need to start using the same tools that they use against us and start demanding that they respect our rights and culture.

[Special T]

Question: How many commissioners voted for the spring bear petition last week?

Question: Why have we not filed suite against the commission yet for their spring bear decision? They clearly knew they had enough bears to keep the hunt. They violated their own mandates to maximize recreational opportunities. There are definitely individuals out there with standing in this matter. Individuals who have purchased points and invested time and have now lost out on that opportunity due to the unwarranted actions of the commission.

Even more than time and money, individuals have lost out on experiences of cultural value to them due to the actions of the commission. Can you ever replace a hunt or trip with a loved one that you were denied for frivolous reasons? Arbitrary and illegal government action?

We need to stop begging them to do the right thing when we know they won't. We need to start using the same tools that they use against us and start demanding that they respect our rights and culture.

Why don't we sue? Well lawsuits are political, it requires the same kind maneuvering that getting politicians to do what they should be doing. It takes a stack of cash wwc spent a bunch and guess what? It got thrown out for no standing by a judge appointed by Inslee. AND all lawsuits against the state have to be filed in Thurston county superior court. Olympia

[Slamadoo]

I don't think the lawsuit you are referring to is anything like what I am mentioning or suggesting.

Wasn't the WWC lawsuit you are referring to about commission appointments?

[ducks4days]

The idea has been batted around. Even if you got the law changed, you’d have inslee or Ferguson appointing the director.

Who said Ferguson is going to be our next governor?

https://mynorthwest.com/3939633/polling-reichert-ahead-ferguson-wa-governor-race/

I like the OP idea, but don’t know how you’re going to get it passed. Maybe voter initiative?

Its basically a foregone conclusion. We either get enough republicans to vote for a solid D in the primaries to have a reasonable alternative during the general: or we have another 60/40 split with Sideshow Bob winning without any real opposition. If there was an option to bet on which one happens I would throw down a TON of money on the latter.

We should be filing petitions to correct the bad decisions of the commission. We should file so many so often that they get discussed at every single meeting until we see meaningful change. When they get voted down, we should tweak them and file again. When they get voted down again, we should sue. When the suit fails we should introduce voter initiatives with simple language that is guaranteed to pass. Then we should do it again and build on the momentum. When the initiatives fail we should be calling our representatives and ask them to introduce legislation which the commission cant dance around. When they placate us we should call again. And we should call again. And again until they are so annoyed that they do it just to get the phone calls to stop when they arent even in session.

The anti's arent winning because there are more of them, the overwhelming majority of people support regulated hunting. They are winning because they have nothing better to do, and they are persistent. We either need to learn this lesson, or get out of the way.

[bearpaw]

I wanted to put this in its own thread so it didn't get lost or pollute the other threads, and I hope it can stay non-political so it doesn't get moved or locked.

But have any of those activatly opposing the Commission ever considered a different approach than what has already been tried?

Specifically, I am thinking of working on getting the regulatory power removed from the Commission and put back directly under WDFW?

Leave the Commission in place as advisors olny, or disband completely, but either way, take away their power to set rules & regulations in any and all form.

If they (the Commission) are not able to actually make, change, or in anyway control the rules, seasons, harvest, etc., and it fell back under WDFW proper where biologists and such would be the ones that have the final say, then the Commission would have no way to forward any type of personal or political adgenda as it seems they are currently doing unchecked.

My guess is it would be an uphill battle and not an easy task, maybe even requiring more legal action/suits filed, but that may be the better path than what is/has been done so far...

Mostly I think we need a new governor. The system is not that bad, we are just seeing the effect of having a particular governor who is anti-hunter friendly for too long. The impact of changing the system at a time when hunters have little say in government leads me to think the outcome of any attempted change might be worse?

[bearpaw]

The idea has been batted around. Even if you got the law changed, you’d have inslee or Ferguson appointing the director.

Who said Ferguson is going to be our next governor?

https://mynorthwest.com/3939633/polling-reichert-ahead-ferguson-wa-governor-race/

I like the OP idea, but don’t know how you’re going to get it passed. Maybe voter initiative?

Its basically a foregone conclusion. We either get enough republicans to vote for a solid D in the primaries to have a reasonable alternative during the general: or we have another 60/40 split with Sideshow Bob winning without any real opposition. If there was an option to bet on which one happens I would throw down a TON of money on the latter.

We should be filing petitions to correct the bad decisions of the commission. We should file so many so often that they get discussed at every single meeting until we see meaningful change. When they get voted down, we should tweak them and file again. When they get voted down again, we should sue. When the suit fails we should introduce voter initiatives with simple language that is guaranteed to pass. Then we should do it again and build on the momentum. When the initiatives fail we should be calling our representatives and ask them to introduce legislation which the commission cant dance around. When they placate us we should call again. And we should call again. And again until they are so annoyed that they do it just to get the phone calls to stop when they arent even in session.

The anti's arent winning because there are more of them, the overwhelming majority of people support regulated hunting. They are winning because they have nothing better to do, and they are persistent. We either need to learn this lesson, or get out of the way.

  bury them in paper work, it leaves them less time to focus on how to take away more hunting opportunities

[actionshooter]

The idea has been batted around. Even if you got the law changed, you’d have inslee or Ferguson appointing the director.

Who said Ferguson is going to be our next governor?

https://mynorthwest.com/3939633/polling-reichert-ahead-ferguson-wa-governor-race/

I like the OP idea, but don’t know how you’re going to get it passed. Maybe voter initiative?

Its basically a foregone conclusion. We either get enough republicans to vote for a solid D in the primaries to have a reasonable alternative during the general: or we have another 60/40 split with Sideshow Bob winning without any real opposition. If there was an option to bet on which one happens I would throw down a TON of money on the latter

A new Gov is the quickest way to  change the commission, we can win in litigation, and it's coming but it will take a lot of time and money.

 I disagree... Reichert was a hugely popular Sheriff in King County and then went on to 14 years in the 8th district... this guy has a real chance... 
 When you run a no-name eastern Washington small town cop (who I liked) for Gov... you get a 60-40 split.

[ducks4days]

The idea has been batted around. Even if you got the law changed, you’d have inslee or Ferguson appointing the director.

Who said Ferguson is going to be our next governor?

https://mynorthwest.com/3939633/polling-reichert-ahead-ferguson-wa-governor-race/

I like the OP idea, but don’t know how you’re going to get it passed. Maybe voter initiative?

Its basically a foregone conclusion. We either get enough republicans to vote for a solid D in the primaries to have a reasonable alternative during the general: or we have another 60/40 split with Sideshow Bob winning without any real opposition. If there was an option to bet on which one happens I would throw down a TON of money on the latter

A new Gov is the quickest way to  change the commission, we can win in litigation, and it's coming but it will take a lot of time and money.

 I disagree... Reichert was a hugely popular Sheriff in King County and then went on to 14 years in the 8th district... this guy has a real chance... 
 When you run a no-name eastern Washington small town cop (who I liked) for Gov... you get a 60-40 split.

Reichert was appointed Sheriff then won a single election without opposition 20 years and 800,000 Californians ago. The 8th district is not a statewide election. As much as I wish things were different, nobody with an R next to their name will win a statewide election in WA. Especially not in a presidential election year. Especially not in the next presidential election year.

You are right about a new Gov being the quickest way to fix things. That doesnt make it realistic.