Post by: pianoman9701 on October 22, 2015, 11:19:35 AM
"OLYMPIA – The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) is seeking nominees for a new committee responsible for reviewing claims for certain types of livestock losses caused by wolves.
WDFW Director Jim Unsworth will appoint up to five state residents to the Livestock Review Committee to consider claims filed by ranchers for reduced weight gain, low pregnancy rates, and higher-than-normal livestock losses related to wolves.
The department already pays ranchers market value for verified cases of livestock killed by wolves, but will look to the new committee to recommend fair compensation for other wolf-related losses, said Donny Martorello, WDFW wolf specialist.
“We’re looking for a mix of candidates with experience in both livestock production and wildlife conservation,” Martorello said. “Successful candidates will be asked to review criteria for compensating ranchers for indirect losses and to work together in applying them fairly.”
State administrative rules authorize compensation for indirect livestock losses, but WDFW has only recently received any applicable claims, Martorello said.
Applications and nominations for committee membership must be postmarked by Saturday, Oct. 31. They should be sent to Mick Cope, Game Division Manager, at the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capitol Way N., Olympia, WA 98501-1091; or by email to Mick.Cope@dfw.wa.gov.
The committee will likely meet about four times a year to review claims and advise the department on settlement offers and denial of claims, Martorello said. Members will serve staggered terms of one to two years.
Committee members should be available for meetings beginning as early as mid-November. Upon request, committee members will be reimbursed by WDFW for travel expenses to attend meetings.
Applications and nominations must be submitted in writing and include applicants’ or nominees’:
Name, address, telephone number, and email address.
Relevant experience, organizational affiliations, and reasons why he or she would be an effective advisory group member.
Experience with livestock production and livestock assessment.
Experience with natural resource management and wildlife conservation.
Experience in collaborating with people who have different values.
People or groups making nominations must submit their own names and contact information along with their nominees’."
http://wdfw.wa.gov/news/oct1315b/
Post by: bobcat on October 22, 2015, 12:20:08 PM
Post by: grundy53 on October 22, 2015, 12:26:18 PM
I don't know... it just seems like another step they're taking in dealing with the increasing numbers of wolves in this state. If this is the best way to fairly handle the compensation for livestock losses due to wolves, I fail to see why this is a problem. :dunno:Key word being "fairly". I have my doubts that it will be.
Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 22, 2015, 12:30:34 PM
I don't know... it just seems like another step they're taking in dealing with the increasing numbers of wolves in this state. If this is the best way to fairly handle the compensation for livestock losses due to wolves, I fail to see why this is a problem. :dunno:
Once they appoint the members and the members recommend that compensation be tied to the ranchers' having to introduce non-lethal wolf measure to receive compensation, instead of delisting in the NE and opening up a season on wolves, you'll understand what I'm talking about. The NE population is already being screwed because of the make-up of the WAG and the fact that the enviro-wacko members of the WAG have the ear of our idiot governor. We've already seen the result in the governor overriding the WDFW decision to up cougar quotas in an attempt to relive predator pressure. He knows from where his votes come and shamelessly panders to that. The WDFW has been lying to us all along about true management of these eaters and that became obvious in the minutes of the May WAG meeting when it was stated several times that WA has a different "political atmosphere" thank ID and MT. It seems very obvious to me and others where we're going here and it aint towards management.
Post by: bobcat on October 22, 2015, 12:42:22 PM
Post by: Curly on October 22, 2015, 12:43:44 PM
Why doesn't WDFW just use existing employees to determine compensation?
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 22, 2015, 12:46:58 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 22, 2015, 01:14:00 PM
What you say may be true, but it could happen that way even if they didn't put together this new committee. That's all I was saying- that the establishment of this committee isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Why couldn't the WAG do this, as well? Something smells and it's not just dead cattle. Mark my words. This is not going to be good for anyone but the huggers and the wolves.
Post by: KFhunter on October 22, 2015, 01:16:49 PM
What you say may be true, but it could happen that way even if they didn't put together this new committee. That's all I was saying- that the establishment of this committee isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Why couldn't the WAG do this, as well? Something smells and it's not just dead cattle. Mark my words. This is not going to be good for anyone but the huggers and the wolves.
I'm glad to see the mechanism in place and indirect losses openly acknowledged; I also agree that the committee will be rendered useless by pro-wolf advocates. I dislike condemning it before it even begins but the WAG has set a precedence here.
Perhaps this new committee won't be mired down by wolf politics and instead can focus solely on the veracity of the claims, perhaps that's why this separation from the WAG.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on October 22, 2015, 01:32:51 PM
Post by: bobcat on October 22, 2015, 01:33:43 PM
What you say may be true, but it could happen that way even if they didn't put together this new committee. That's all I was saying- that the establishment of this committee isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Why couldn't the WAG do this, as well? Something smells and it's not just dead cattle. Mark my words. This is not going to be good for anyone but the huggers and the wolves.
Well, I don't know. I would expect the people in charge know what they're doing and have their reasons for doing so.
Post by: pianoman9701 on October 22, 2015, 01:35:01 PM
Post by: Curly on October 22, 2015, 02:14:09 PM
What you say may be true, but it could happen that way even if they didn't put together this new committee. That's all I was saying- that the establishment of this committee isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Why couldn't the WAG do this, as well? Something smells and it's not just dead cattle. Mark my words. This is not going to be good for anyone but the huggers and the wolves.
Well, I don't know. I would expect the people in charge know what they're doing and have their reasons for doing so.
:bash:
They know exactly what they're doing. They want to deflect criticism away from the Wildlife Department when some rancher makes a claim that he lost X amount of money due to wolves. They want to use some "group" as a scapegoat. Problem is, WDFW is putting the group together, so they are going to be responsible for any decisions.
Post by: bigtex on October 22, 2015, 02:54:20 PM
Why doesn't WDFW just use existing employees to determine compensation?
That would instantly throw up red flags of corruption, etc since it's such a hot issue. If there weren't wolves, this committee wouldn't be formed, we don't have a deer/elk damage committee. Its a lot harder to blame a group of citizens then it is a group of agency employees.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk