6 Tribes step in over concerns about "Conservation Policy"

[TriggerMike]

The Tribes asked the AG office to step in and tell the commission to hold off, which the AG did, and the commission obeyed. The new commission doesnt want to be on Ferguson's bad side since they assume he will beat Reichert this November.

[huntnphool]

I wasn’t worried about this policy, but I’m glad some of you are very slowly figuring out who runs wdfw.

 Unbelievable!

[huntnphool]

I wasn’t worried about this policy, but I’m glad some of you are very slowly figuring out who runs wdfw.

Not to derail this thread, but how were you not concerned about a majority of anti hunters rewriting the management plan?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s a policy with no teeth, not a management plan.
The tribes run wdfw anyway and don’t like bad press.

 Get your head out of your…the sand!

 The commissions run WDFW, because they can’t be removed! That’s why the other thread is such a joke as well!

 Libs have figured out that once elected, all they have to do is create a “commission” to run their agendas, so the commission can point their fingers elsewhere, without anybody being able to do a single thing about it!

 It’s why I’ve always had a issue with the archery commission showing up to WDFW meetings and giving their $0.02. Hunters don’t vote in these archery commission members, yet the commission is giving their opinions on regulations moving forward? How does that commission know what I want as a archery hunter?….They don’t, and they don’t care, several are only their to get their own interests served!…and I know that as fact!!!

[Jake Dogfish]

I wasn’t worried about this policy, but I’m glad some of you are very slowly figuring out who runs wdfw.

Not to derail this thread, but how were you not concerned about a majority of anti hunters rewriting the management plan?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s a policy with no teeth, not a management plan.
The tribes run wdfw anyway and don’t like bad press.

 Get your head out of your…the sand!

 The commissions run WDFW, because they can’t be removed! That’s why the other thread is such a joke as well!

 Libs have figured out that once elected, all they have to do is create a “commission” to run their agendas, so the commission can point their fingers elsewhere, without anybody being able to do a single thing about it!

 It’s why I’ve always had a issue with the archery commission showing up to WDFW meetings and giving their $0.02. Hunters don’t vote in these archery commission members, yet the commission is giving their opinions on regulations moving forward? How does that commission know what I want as a archery hunter?….They don’t, and they don’t care, several are only their to get their own interests served!…and I know that as fact!!!

I always appreciate the late night insults. 
I think you are talking about an advisory group? Hard to tell.

[huntnphool]

I wasn’t worried about this policy, but I’m glad some of you are very slowly figuring out who runs wdfw.

Not to derail this thread, but how were you not concerned about a majority of anti hunters rewriting the management plan?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s a policy with no teeth, not a management plan.
The tribes run wdfw anyway and don’t like bad press.

 Get your head out of your…the sand!

 The commissions run WDFW, because they can’t be removed! That’s why the other thread is such a joke as well!

 Libs have figured out that once elected, all they have to do is create a “commission” to run their agendas, so the commission can point their fingers elsewhere, without anybody being able to do a single thing about it!

 It’s why I’ve always had a issue with the archery commission showing up to WDFW meetings and giving their $0.02. Hunters don’t vote in these archery commission members, yet the commission is giving their opinions on regulations moving forward? How does that commission know what I want as a archery hunter?….They don’t, and they don’t care, several are only their to get their own interests served!…and I know that as fact!!!

I always appreciate the late night insults. 
I think you are talking about an advisory group? Hard to tell.

 Both appointed and not voted in is the point, but I think you know that!

[NOCK NOCK]

It seems like we (as hunters and fishman) should be sending thoughtful emails to these tribes to show our support for their efforts. It never hurts to reinforce a positive. Maybe along the lines of:

"We as true conservationist of fish and game support your efforts in holding the WDFW commission accountable to their mandate of ensuring the proper management of our game species. The commission has shown little thought to maintaining our game and our hunting and fishing heritage as sportsman. I want to commend you for fighting for all sportsman in the state of Washington and hope you do not waiver on this issue today or in the future as we share a mutual interest in protecting and proliferating our herds in this state"

I am no an expert on tribal affairs between us sportsman and their objectives; however, it seems like they are often aligned. Sending emails in support to their counsels might lead to better outcomes today and going forward (future issues).

Does anyone know the proper emails that we can send such emails to? Maybe list them here? Is there other hunter friendly tribes that we should also be sending letters too?

I think if anything, we should probably remember our place and theirs in any statements. They aren't standing up for all sportsmen- they are standing up for their Tribes and treaty rights. IF there is overlap, it's a happy accident. We should offer support, if they'd like it, to ensure the commission upholds their end faithfully. Remember, they are flexing their co-managers rights, and we are stakeholders under the other co-manager.

Who's knows-in the scope of things maybe the Tribes end up loving the policy. We should still support their right to consultation and then take up our beef with the commission after.

Gratitude is good, but we need to be respectful in not giving direction or assuming alignment

This    (escp. the bolded part)   ................. and as asked by an earlier post, what about the bigger tribes?

If the commission bans ALL hunting soon, does that stop the tribes from hunting too?   









3.....2......1.......

[Jake Dogfish]

It seems like we (as hunters and fishman) should be sending thoughtful emails to these tribes to show our support for their efforts. It never hurts to reinforce a positive. Maybe along the lines of:

"We as true conservationist of fish and game support your efforts in holding the WDFW commission accountable to their mandate of ensuring the proper management of our game species. The commission has shown little thought to maintaining our game and our hunting and fishing heritage as sportsman. I want to commend you for fighting for all sportsman in the state of Washington and hope you do not waiver on this issue today or in the future as we share a mutual interest in protecting and proliferating our herds in this state"

I am no an expert on tribal affairs between us sportsman and their objectives; however, it seems like they are often aligned. Sending emails in support to their counsels might lead to better outcomes today and going forward (future issues).

Does anyone know the proper emails that we can send such emails to? Maybe list them here? Is there other hunter friendly tribes that we should also be sending letters too?

I think if anything, we should probably remember our place and theirs in any statements. They aren't standing up for all sportsmen- they are standing up for their Tribes and treaty rights. IF there is overlap, it's a happy accident. We should offer support, if they'd like it, to ensure the commission upholds their end faithfully. Remember, they are flexing their co-managers rights, and we are stakeholders under the other co-manager.

Who's knows-in the scope of things maybe the Tribes end up loving the policy. We should still support their right to consultation and then take up our beef with the commission after.

Gratitude is good, but we need to be respectful in not giving direction or assuming alignment

This    (escp. the bolded part)   ................. and as asked by an earlier post, what about the bigger tribes?

If the commission bans ALL hunting soon, does that stop the tribes from hunting too?   









3.....2......1.......

Why would any tribe want to ban hunting? 
We still have a disconnect on who is in charge here.

[Special T]

I wasn’t worried about this policy, but I’m glad some of you are very slowly figuring out who runs wdfw.

Not to derail this thread, but how were you not concerned about a majority of anti hunters rewriting the management plan?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s a policy with no teeth, not a management plan.
The tribes run wdfw anyway and don’t like bad press.

 Get your head out of your…the sand!

 The commissions run WDFW, because they can’t be removed! That’s why the other thread is such a joke as well!

 Libs have figured out that once elected, all they have to do is create a “commission” to run their agendas, so the commission can point their fingers elsewhere, without anybody being able to do a single thing about it!

 It’s why I’ve always had a issue with the archery commission showing up to WDFW meetings and giving their $0.02. Hunters don’t vote in these archery commission members, yet the commission is giving their opinions on regulations moving forward? How does that commission know what I want as a archery hunter?….They don’t, and they don’t care, several are only their to get their own interests served!…and I know that as fact!!!

I'm curiouse about your archery commission statement. Can you give some more details so I can find it? A name wdfw commission meeting date, time or comment period?

[HUNTIN4SIX]

I think the deception runs deep.  Too many celebrating as if this will secure our future hunting/fishing in Washington.  The tribes don’t get an award...maybe a participation trophy, but no celebration from me yet.  Most tribes will only be interested in their own preservation not the general populace.  Soon they could be ruling and reigning and the rest of us will be in the same lack of opportunity boat.  I am keeping one eye open on this one. 

[hunter399]

I think the deception runs deep.  Too many celebrating as if this will secure our future hunting/fishing in Washington.  The tribes don’t get an award...maybe a participation trophy, but no celebration from me yet.  Most tribes will only be interested in their own preservation not the general populace.  Soon they could be ruling and reigning and the rest of us will be in the same lack of opportunity boat.  I am keeping one eye open on this one.

I agree ,I think this just slowed the boat down. It didn't kill the motor.
It definitely didn't sink the ship.This policy is designed to kill coyote hunting.
Basically designed to regulate unclassified wildlife in the biodiversity world.
Anyone that predator hunts or traps should be concerned.
The tribe,the last page .It's a three page document,last page has some stuff about the tribe.
There may be something there that they didn't like.

[Practical Approach]

Everyone shoudl be proud of working together to do everything they could to stop the Conservation Policy.  The hunting community banded together to testify, send emails etc.  The Tribes did what they needed to do to try to stop the Conservation Policy. 

Everyone's efforts add up and do make a difference.  Who gets credit and how much.  Just appreciate that everyone is working together for the same cause.  Does it matter whether Tribes are looking out for state hunters?  Do state hunters look out for the Tribes?  What matters is that everyone keeps fighting against the preservationist commissioners cause and makes it is difficult as possible to promote their agenda. 

Keep up the good work, it isn't over.

[actionshooter]

Everyone shoudl be proud of working together to do everything they could to stop the Conservation Policy.  The hunting community banded together to testify, send emails etc.  The Tribes did what they needed to do to try to stop the Conservation Policy. 

Everyone's efforts add up and do make a difference.  Who gets credit and how much.  Just appreciate that everyone is working together for the same cause.  Does it matter whether Tribes are looking out for state hunters?  Do state hunters look out for the Tribes?  What matters is that everyone keeps fighting against the preservationist commissioners cause and makes it is difficult as possible to promote their agenda. 

Keep up the good work, it isn't over.

Well said...

[Skyvalhunter]

My concern would be that the tribes negotiating a deal excluding them from the conservation policy. Or fall back on the Bolt decision excluding them.

[SuperX]

My concern would be that the tribes negotiating a deal excluding them from the conservation policy. Or fall back on the Bolt decision excluding them.

in the end they will do what the Boldt decision allows them to do which is a lot, but Boldt depends on a specific definition of conservation that the tribes can't allow to be changed or weakened.

[time2hunt]

Not a peep from the yakamas or colvilles . 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk