HB 1930, Republican sponsored changes to Commission

[HUNTINCOUPLE]

Supported, Anyone can have an agenda but if they follow science, biologists recommendations and the North American model of conservation it’d work for me. No ballot box management.

    And no biologist agendas. Just the science.

[Humptulips]

Each region has multiple counties correct? How would they decide legislative authority? Skagit and king are both in R4.

That's described in the bill.

Essentially every county in R4 nominates 1 person to serve on the commission. They also nominate one person to serve as the delegate for the final voting committee for the commission appointment. The delegates for all counties in R4 then select who will represent R4.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Who nominates them, the voters? some smoke filled room of 'insiders'?  The justice of the peace?    Did this approach ever exist in WA and how did it work?  Not against fixing the problem but we need to be sure we don't go from the current model which will always be problematic, to one that is equally doomed. 

I would rather see a bill saying that the commission is not empowered to reduce seasons or harvest limits and must get permission to do so from the tribes or the hunters and fishers themselves, maybe an add on to getting your license you vote for a commissioner in your region from a list of nominees.  The biologists could create a standard, based on science, by which harvest should be reduced.  e.g. if herd size drops to some pre-defined level, or some harvest number is too high, these closures/adjustments will be made.  I would also want to see a bill saying that the commissioners must be active hunter/fisher similar to this proposed bill.

The County Commissioners of each county would get to nominate candidates and also select a delegate to vote on a F&W Commissioner for their region.