I was able to get some support for this from the Pierce County Council, even though the comment period is closed, this was sent to all.of her constituents today
Yesterday, I received an alert from an observant constituent about a policy drafted by the WDFW Conservation Commission to set conservation policy guidance that will dramatically affect how we recreate and use our natural resources. This information will be of great interest to outdoor sports enthusiasts, particularly in Pierce County. The Commission establishes policies to preserve, protect, and perpetuate fish, wildlife, and ecosystems while providing sustainable fish and wildlife recreation and commercial opportunities compatible with healthy and diverse fish and wildlife populations.
The deadline for comments has passed, but you may want to try and send your comments anyway. The commissioners from Stevens County did send in their comments, with interesting points such as:
…we find that your proposed policy is contrary to law, especially the wording and intent of RCW 77.04.012 which you cite in your purpose statement. For
example, your policy states, “As trustees tasked with managing fish and wildlife resources in the public trust, conservation of fish, wildlife, and habitat is the paramount responsibility of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). RCW 77.04.012 in part states, “The department shall conserve the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish resources in a manner that does not impair the resource.” These last few words are left off your policy draft and are highly important. The current actions of the Commission are impairing the resource and ignoring science and the public.
The law goes on to say, “The commission shall attempt to maximize the public recreational game fishing and hunting opportunities of all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.” Conservation by itself does not eliminate hunting and fishing opportunities, yet this policy is attempting to do just that.
“Native species and natural ecosystems” are not part of any definition I could find in several dictionaries, or part of the law, which the commission is bound to follow.
Further, we do not believe it is possible for the Commission to have the knowledge to know what is “native” or “natural” in the state of Washington.
Principle #2 goes on further to state that the Commission is to manage through “ecosystem-based” management. This would mean that rather than maintaining numbers of particular animals for the benefit of recreational hunting and fishing, the ecosystem comes first. This directly contradicts the mandate in RCW 77.04.012 that the commission must follow.
The Sportsman’s Alliance was also very succinct in their comments to the Commission. They wrote: RCW 77.04.012 establishes a very clear mandate for the Department and Commission. Instead of recognizing the clarity of this language, the draft Conservation Policy promotes a new “mission” that broadens the scope well beyond what the legislature intended. “Protecting and restoring ecosystems” is not included in RCW 77.04.012. To read their comments, click here.
Have you ever imagined earth without people? Picture your garden the day it’s freshly prepped and planted, and then again in six weeks with no weeding. Then again in six plus years with no maintenance. To me, it’s not a pretty picture. Grizzly bears can probably cut through the brush. The ungulates will be mostly gone, and probably all the bunnies. I’m reminded of the Wildlands Project, a dream of Dave Foreman and Reed Noss. I found a report about the Wildlands Project that was filed with the Iowa Utilities Board on Sept. 1, 2022, in opposition to the proposed carbon pipelines by Summit Carbon Solutions and Navigator CO2 Ventures, as well as the anticipated ADM/Wolf Pipeline (I still care about my home state).
I appreciate her support and letting everyone know what the commission is trying to.do.
