Post by: MeatDown on February 26, 2009, 04:25:59 PM
Previous Thread...http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,20289.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,20289.0.html)
Thanks
Shawn
Below is an email that I got today... please read and help by calling and emailing your Representatives!
-------------------------
Good evening, all
I just learned that Senator Jacobsen and the majority party passed SSB 5127 out of the Senate Natural Resources, Ocean, and Recreation Committee (chaired by Jacobsen) this morning. This is an amended version of Jacobsen's SB 5127. Links to the bill and the Senate Digest of the bill are posted below. Today was the last day for such legislation to get out of the initial committee. There was a brief hearing and limited testimony on the bill. A summary of the testimony is posted below.
This bill is no better than 5127 and needs to be stopped. The bill has been sent over to the Senate Rules Committee (a link to the committee membership is posted below). I would encourage you to contact your Senators, especially if they serve on the Rules Committee to request that the bill not be passed onto the floor of the Senate and if it does make the floor that it be stopped there. You should also cc your House Representatives in case the bill passes out of the Senate and is sent over to the House.
Thanks
Dave Croonquist
Staff Summary of Public Testimony on Original Bill: PRO: DFW needs a professional,
full-time, cabinet level director that is appointed by the Governor. The current Commission
is not trained in fisheries management and is inconsistently involved in the fisheries
management process. If it is to remain, the Commission should serve a merely advisory role.
CON: The Commission was created by a vote of the people, so only a vote of the people
should change its structure. The Commission is composed of citizens who work very hard to
understand complex fish and wildlife issues. They also oversee public processes that allow
broad public and stakeholder participation.
OTHER: There are larger questions out there than just the number of Commission members.
A stakeholder group should be commissioned to review the Commission and come back with
recommendations to the Legislature. Many stakeholders have concerns about the current
makeup of the Commission, even if they support the Commission model itself. Although it
may not be the right vehicle, this bill provides a good start to conversations about the issue.
Persons Testifying: PRO: Steve Robinson, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission.
CON: Carl Burke, Northwest Sports Fishing Association; John Douglas, Washington
Wildlife Federation.
OTHER: Bill Robinson, The Nature Conservancy; Ed Owens, Coalition of Coastal
Fisheries, Hunters Heritage Council.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5127
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bill%20Reports/Senate/5127%20SBR%20NROR%2009.pdf
http://www.leg.wa.gov/Senate/Committees/RULE/members.htm
Post by: Dave Workman on March 10, 2009, 08:22:39 AM
Post by: woodswalker on March 10, 2009, 08:26:54 AM
Vote YES on SSB5127.
Post by: Dave Workman on March 10, 2009, 10:10:58 AM
Here:
Read the legislation:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=5127
Post by: huntnphool on March 10, 2009, 10:17:08 AM
Quote
Persons Testifying: PRO: Steve Robinson, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission.
CON: Carl Burke, Northwest Sports Fishing Association; John Douglas, Washington
Wildlife Federation.
Why do the tribes support it and the sportsmen do not? :dunno:
Post by: MeatDown on March 11, 2009, 06:27:58 AM
Also, if we the people can’t put together a petition signing initiative to change the law because our ELECTED officials are not doing what we ask then what recourse do we have?
I have heard that Washington State Bow Hunters and Safari Club International – Washington was also supporting this bill… does anyone know for sure? And if so why?
This bill is NOT about saving money.
Shawn
Post by: Snapshot on March 11, 2009, 08:16:44 AM
That being said the current commission is hamstrung by vacancies. The Governor screwed it up by firing four commissioners and replacing them four of her own choosing. Then came a political power struggle; they pushed out the Vice-Chair, Fred Shiosaki; one or two resigned, term expired for another. And no one has been appointed to fill the vacancies. And four of the remaining six, as of yet, have not been confirmed by the Senate (I think they are trying to show the Governor who is really in charge).
So is it broken? Yes it is. But it is all we have standing between us and some bunny-hugging Governor who may one day get in there and hire a like-minded department director who then guts our hunting opportunity.
There is politics in the bill. Senator Jacobsen has loyalties in places other than big game hunting. I don't believe he was thinking of us hunters when he crafted his bill. I believe he was thinking of commercial fishing; I believe they are not happy with the current commissioners.
Washington State Bowhunters, as of this date, HAS NOT endorsed this bill... I don’t know about the HHC; there may be a conflict of interest there because their leader has close ties to commercial fishing, too. Leaders of the three statewide archery organizations were asked at the commission meeting in Ellensburg to get behind it but were reluctant to do so.
The problem with this bill is that it makes the "new" commission an advisory board. No one worth a hill of beans is going to spend their valuable time serving on a commission without teeth. If the bill were amended to give the commission the authority to set the seasons, then it would find some support from people who don't want the department to be able to run unchecked.
Post by: Dave Workman on March 14, 2009, 06:50:18 PM
Dave, I have heard that several hunting organization are supporting bill 5127, and I am not clear as to why (probably politics)… do you have any insight as to why any sportsman’s group would want to give the power back to the governor?
Also, if we the people can’t put together a petition signing initiative to change the law because our ELECTED officials are not doing what we ask then what recourse do we have?
I have heard that Washington State Bow Hunters and Safari Club International – Washington was also supporting this bill… does anyone know for sure? And if so why?
This bill is NOT about saving money.
Shawn
Well, I don't like the bill as written. I have no idea why any hunting group would support turning the appointment of the director back to the governor.
HOWEVER, what this legislation may do is take apart the PRESENT wildlife commission, which has, for the most part, been a disaster.
Shirley Solomon quit because, I am told, she simply got tired of the crap.
Gutzwiler has left the board, also.
George Orr, the former state lawmaker, is the only member who has been confirmed, and he is definitely in our corner. I spent an hour with him on the phone about two months ago.
As for the rest of them, opinions seem to run from bad to worse.
Hunters need to unite on this one. I guess it's time to contact your House member and tell them to amend SSB5127, to dismantle and re-make the commission but retain its authority to appoint the director.
That would be my suggestion.
And after that, depending upon whom one talks with, maybe dismantle and rebuild the agency.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on March 14, 2009, 09:30:27 PM
Post by: Snapshot on March 16, 2009, 08:19:52 PM
SB5127 needs to die in committee. IF that happens the Senate will be compelled to move forward with the confirmation processes and those commissioners who are unworthy will be s*#%-canned and others will be appointed to take their places.
We can't let Referendum 45 be replaced by this law. It is referendum 45 that gave us equity and protections. This would strip all that away.
Post by: Snapshot on March 17, 2009, 07:46:07 PM
I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused and especially to Mr. Owens. I will attempt to do a better job researching facts.
That being said, the bill as it is written is still no good.
Dale
From the Senate website: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bill%20Reports/Senate/5127%20SBR%20APS%2009.pdf
Staff Summary of Public Testimony: PRO: DFW needs a professional, full-time, cabinet level director that is appointed by the Governor. The current Commission is not trained in fisheries management and is inconsistently involved in the fisheries management process. If it is to remain, the Commission should serve a merely advisory role.
CON: The Commission was created by a vote of the people, so only a vote of the people
should change its structure. The Commission is composed of citizens who work very hard to understand complex fish and wildlife issues. They also oversee public processes that allow broad public and stakeholder participation.
OTHER: There are larger questions out there than just the number of Commission members. A stakeholder group should be commissioned to review the Commission and come back with recommendations to the Legislature. Many stakeholders have concerns about the current makeup of the Commission, even if they support the Commission model itself. Although it may not be the right vehicle, this bill provides a good start to conversations about the issue.
Persons Testifying: PRO: Steve Robinson, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission.
CON: Carl Burke, Northwest Sports Fishing Association; John Douglas, Washington
Wildlife Federation.
OTHER: Bill Robinson, The Nature Conservancy; Ed Owens, Coalition of Coastal
Fisheries, Hunters Heritage Council.
Senate Bill
Post by: luvtohnt on March 18, 2009, 03:56:14 PM
Brandon,
Thank you for contacting me on Senate Bill 5127. Accountability is exactly why I voted for the measure on the Senate Floor last week. We need more accountability, not more of the status quo. By giving the Governor the ability to both appoint the Director and the Commission, there is an opportunity for both the Commission and the Department to be held accountable by a statewide elected public official (the Governor) that answers to the voters. Ultimately, there will be more accountability under this measure.
Sincerely,
Senator Janéa Holmquist
13th Legislative District
Brandon
Post by: Skyhigh on March 18, 2009, 10:39:27 PM
And after that, depending upon whom one talks with, maybe dismantle and rebuild the agency.
That is what I am leaning towards, advocating and promoting! it needs to hit rock bottom, house cleaned and re-built..
They will only recieve a fraction of license fees from me now. I will need to see major changes to get me spending money again with the WDFW....
Post by: Coldeadhands on March 19, 2009, 01:25:17 AM
Gave my Senator and Reps my .02 All are GOP so it's probably preaching to the choir. So I sent it to about 4 others including the "Chopper"
I hope you guys have taken the opportunity to really look into the other information recently provided. The strategy is to say its broken, because one group is unhappy. That if you dont change the balance of power, someone will just kill the commission completely.
Owens wants politician to believe hunters are unhappy and split them away from sportfishing. Read the Gutzwiler response. Read the commission position paper and listen to the phone conference meeting. Remember, Owens has already sold out hunters, he makes more money from the commercial fisherman lobby. The fight is over fish. In the meantime, anti hunters and anti gunners will be working against you. Sell out fishermen out of the fish and wildlife? Dont expect sportfisherman to stand up for hunters.