Post by: bobcat on February 08, 2009, 10:37:11 PM
By Scott Sandsberry | Yakima Herald-republic • Published February 03, 2009
YAKIMA – The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife violated state law last spring when it issued a livestock grazing lease on the Whisky Dick/Quilomene Wildlife Area in eastern Kittitas County, a Superior Court judge ruled last week.
The ruling, issued by Judge Chris Wickham in Thurston County Superior Court, said the Department of Fish and Wildlife didn't follow the State Environmental Protection Act process when it allowed a Kittitas cattleman to graze his cattle on the Skookumchuck area acquired by the state agency in 2007.
Steve Herman, the Thurston County resident who filed the suit on behalf of the Western Watersheds Project, a regional conservation group based in Idaho, called last week's ruling "a very clear-cut victory for those of us who would preserve some wildlife areas for wildlife."
Jennifer Quan, lands division manager for the wildlife department, called the ruling a technicality.
SEPA guidelines don't require an environmental analysis if the lands in question have been grazed under a state lease within the past 10 years. Attorneys for the wildlife department and the Washington Cattlemen's Association argued unsuccessfully that the Skookumchuck lands fell under that exemption.
"The judge ruled we did not have proper documentation of a prior lease before we made the decision," Quan said. "We knew there was an oral lease in place, because Russ (Stingley, the cattleman) had been grazing the place when we bought it and he wasn't the owner.
"So we knew there was an agreement in place; we just didn't document it for the record prior to issuing the permit."
Kristin Ruether, an attorney representing the Western Watersheds Project on the lawsuit, said the ruling could affect grazing programs on other state-acquired lands previously used by cattlemen, since many grazing operations are typically handshake deals.
The suit was filed last spring, but not in time to prevent Stingley from grazing five Skookumchuck pastures. A sixth pasture was pulled from the project because of the potential presence of federally protected steelhead in Skookumchuck Creek.
The ruling won't affect future grazing on the Whisky Dick, Quilomene or Skookumchuck areas, because the fish and wildlife department has already drawn up a SEPA-mandated draft Environmental Impact Statement spanning all three wildlife areas.
The draft EIS is available for review online at http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/sepa/sepa.htm. Public comment is due by Feb. 23.
Jack Field, executive vice president of the Washington Cattlemen's Association, called the comment period "a great opportunity for everyone to get involved and exercise their duties as citizens to participate."
Former state fish and wildlife commissioner Bob Tuck of Selah, an opponent of the Whisky Dick grazing, agreed. "At least the public has a chance to look at it, comment on it and, if necessary, challenge it," he said.
Of the three alternatives covered in the 151-page draft EIS, the proposed action would implement managed grazing across all of the state wildlife lands in the Whisky Dick/Quilomene/Skookumchuck area.
Post by: ICEMAN on February 09, 2009, 05:45:00 AM
Wouldnt it be nice to have faith in the efforts of DFW, that they would do the right thing without having to be watched over by so many....?
Post by: colockumelk on February 09, 2009, 11:58:49 AM
Post by: runamuk on February 09, 2009, 06:10:20 PM
This state has so many problems with management I often wonder if any of it can be fixed.....
Post by: WDFW-SUX on February 09, 2009, 06:20:19 PM
Post by: Dmanmastertracker on February 09, 2009, 07:41:15 PM
Boy I hear you there, well said. We rely on them to carry out there business in the best interest of the wildlife, it seems sometimes you can't turn your back on them. With the GOV even more heavily involved now with the boards going away, we will likely see even more of this.
Post by: logger on February 09, 2009, 07:42:33 PM
Post by: runamuk on February 11, 2009, 10:57:46 AM
was the trendwest exchange public land or plum creek, I can't remember.
Mostly plum creek, but there were a few weird private parcels and public parcels that were swapped as well.
Post by: luvtohnt on February 11, 2009, 11:12:07 AM
Quote
Honestly one of the land exchanges that still pisses me off is the Trendwest exchangeAmen!!
What most people don't know is Plum Crooke aquired that land through a trade with the NFS. They traded them a logged out area for all that prime timberland for a harvest, and then sold it to trend west and skipped town. Same as with Saphire Skies along Lake Cle Elum.
Brandon
Post by: yajsab on February 11, 2009, 01:13:16 PM
Post by: woodswalker on February 11, 2009, 01:18:04 PM
That's good that they get punish. I need my hunting area comes September - without sheeps.
those are just short, fuzzy albino deer..... :yike:
Post by: runamuk on February 11, 2009, 06:03:11 PM
QuoteHonestly one of the land exchanges that still pisses me off is the Trendwest exchangeAmen!!
What most people don't know is Plum Crooke aquired that land through a trade with the NFS. They traded them a logged out area for all that prime timberland for a harvest, and then sold it to trend west and skipped town. Same as with Saphire Skies along Lake Cle Elum.
Brandon
Yep.....really screwed up a bunch of what WAS public land.....
Post by: luvtohnt on February 11, 2009, 06:09:01 PM
Quote
That's good that they get punish. I need my hunting area comes September - without sheeps
First off they graze cattle out there, and deer season is permit only in that unit. So they wouldn't be in anybodys way.
Brandon