Post by: WWC on June 04, 2022, 09:26:42 PM
56min and watch 10 minutes.. She calls out the department for transparency, then says she doesn't need to see the hunters survey.
https://tvw.org/video/washington-fish-and-wildlife-commission-wildlife-committee-2022051165/?eventID=2022051165&fbclid=IwAR3z_5DayHj8PezkRPp62ZEkZf8Tm7MinuWs3JbH9W8Z7N9BfW5DPWX4umM
Post by: Rainier10 on June 04, 2022, 10:04:15 PM
Post by: X-Force on June 04, 2022, 10:27:05 PM
Post by: KFhunter on June 04, 2022, 10:29:03 PM
Post by: Meathunter06 on June 04, 2022, 10:36:14 PM
Post by: wags on June 04, 2022, 10:47:36 PM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on June 05, 2022, 06:41:50 AM
Post by: MtnMuley on June 05, 2022, 07:05:01 AM
Post by: idahohuntr on June 05, 2022, 07:32:16 AM
Can't believe those 2 a$$clowns share a pair of glasses.:yeah: :chuckle:
Post by: Rainier10 on June 05, 2022, 08:11:20 AM
I don't see what you are referring to in the link you provided.??The department contracted a private company to do two surveys. One survey was to all Washington residents asking them about wildlife and the other survey only went to hunters. The company finished the public survey first and was still working on the hunter survey. Lorna smith aske the company, not WDFW staff for a copy which they gave her. She is pissed that as soon as WDFW had one survey they didn’t release it to the commission.
WDFW said they were waiting for other survey to compare the two and possibly revise the reports with clarification if there were discrepancies.
Lorna Smith said she doesn’t care what the hunter survey says. The public survey is most important and the commission should have had it immediately.
Basically she wants the commission involved in every step pretty much ruling out the need for WDFW.
Post by: buckfvr on June 05, 2022, 08:25:52 AM
Post by: Tbar on June 05, 2022, 08:41:23 AM
So Im sure its been covered,, but has smith been through the confirmation process ? She sure has a big mouth and maybe if she hasnt been through confirmation she should be duly noted shes way out of her power stroke and she needs to be just as vocal about completing the process personally as she is about issues of wdfw. Senators need to be made aware of the situation surrounding these bs commissioners until they get tired of hearing about it and doing something.She has been confirmed.
Post by: Special T on June 05, 2022, 08:43:05 AM
Post by: Tbar on June 05, 2022, 08:52:59 AM
Republicans need a senate majority to resolve this issue. The Dem led senate natural resources committee punted on conformations. Sportsmen have very few friejoritynd in the majority party.They had hearings for three- Smith, Linville and Anderson. Two of the three were confirmed(Smith and Linville) leaving one of the strongest hunter voices not confirmed and "sitting". The newest three Rowland, Ragan and Lemkuhl did not receive a hearing. This is political posturing, including infighting amongst consumptive users, not wildlife management or policy.
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 05, 2022, 09:00:24 AM
Republicans need a senate majority to resolve this issue. The Dem led senate natural resources committee punted on conformations. Sportsmen have very few friejoritynd in the majority party.They had hearings for three- Smith, Linville and Anderson. Two of the three were confirmed(Smith and Linville) leaving one of the strongest hunter voices not confirmed and "sitting". The newest three Rowland, Ragan and Lemkuhl did not receive a hearing. This is political posturing, including infighting amongst consumptive users, not wildlife management or policy.
I don't think the new appointees care about management. I think they care about ending opportunity. The whole commission is being used as a tool to push anti hunting agenda without having to deal with initiative's and voting...and they aren't even hiding it ...
Post by: KFhunter on June 05, 2022, 09:28:25 AM
Republicans need a senate majority to resolve this issue. The Dem led senate natural resources committee punted on conformations. Sportsmen have very few friejoritynd in the majority party.They had hearings for three- Smith, Linville and Anderson. Two of the three were confirmed(Smith and Linville) leaving one of the strongest hunter voices not confirmed and "sitting". The newest three Rowland, Ragan and Lemkuhl did not receive a hearing. This is political posturing, including infighting amongst consumptive users, not wildlife management or policy.
I don't think the new appointees care about management. I think they care about ending opportunity. The whole commission is being used as a tool to push anti hunting agenda without having to deal with initiative's and voting...and they aren't even hiding it ...
:yeah:
As I said, the good faith "contract" between WDFW and the hunting public is irrevocably broken.
How long before the general hunting public realizes the dept cannot stop them from hunting whenever, wherever and whatever they want?
Post by: Dysfunctional Vet on June 05, 2022, 09:50:28 AM
Sorry I’m a negative Nancy today I’m getting tired of all this bs. “ Can’t we all just get along”?
Nope
Post by: KFhunter on June 05, 2022, 09:56:02 AM
After watching that, it’s apparent that the commission doesn’t care about sportsmen/women. I don’t see it getting any better for us. Soon the commission will be filled with people like those two and it will happen because they will make it happen. Want it to happen. Just like most “things” right now, the commission and wdfw needs to be torn to the ground, rubble burned and rebuilt on fresh ground. But the likely hood of that happening is nil.
Sorry I’m a negative Nancy today I’m getting tired of all this bs. “ Can’t we all just get along”?
Nope
That's not negative nancy, that's just the reality under Inslee and dem control of this state.
We as hunters will loose more and more opportunities not because of game management needs, but due to "social considerations" concerns.
The commission actually said that, see here:
"Social Considerations" is just fancy speak for agenda.
That was a blunt admission that the commission is no longer following their mission statement.
Quote
Fish and Wildlife Commission
The Commission establishes policies to preserve, protect, and perpetuate fish, wildlife, and ecosystems while providing sustainable fish and wildlife recreational and commercial opportunities compatible with healthy and diverse fish and wildlife populations. The Commission consists of nine governor-appointed members that serve six-year terms, hold meetings and hearings around the state and offer opportunities for the public to weigh in on fish and wildlife issues.
Post by: KNOPHISH on June 05, 2022, 10:16:14 AM
Post by: Special T on June 05, 2022, 10:51:48 AM
Are you stating the comissioners or some one else in your last sentenceRepublicans need a senate majority to resolve this issue. The Dem led senate natural resources committee punted on conformations. Sportsmen have very few friejoritynd in the majority party.They had hearings for three- Smith, Linville and Anderson. Two of the three were confirmed(Smith and Linville) leaving one of the strongest hunter voices not confirmed and "sitting". The newest three Rowland, Ragan and Lemkuhl did not receive a hearing. This is political posturing, including infighting amongst consumptive users, not wildlife management or policy.
?
Post by: trophyhunt on June 05, 2022, 11:32:53 AM
Post by: Tbar on June 05, 2022, 11:37:23 AM
The commission (inslee appointed) and the senate natural resources committee. The senate committee is pitting consumptive users against each other. It's a dangerous game for all. It will backfire on the ones propping these legislators up.Are you stating the comissioners or some one else in your last sentenceRepublicans need a senate majority to resolve this issue. The Dem led senate natural resources committee punted on conformations. Sportsmen have very few friejoritynd in the majority party.They had hearings for three- Smith, Linville and Anderson. Two of the three were confirmed(Smith and Linville) leaving one of the strongest hunter voices not confirmed and "sitting". The newest three Rowland, Ragan and Lemkuhl did not receive a hearing. This is political posturing, including infighting amongst consumptive users, not wildlife management or policy.
?
Post by: Special T on June 05, 2022, 12:50:46 PM
The commission (inslee appointed) and the senate natural resources committee. The senate committee is pitting consumptive users against each other. It's a dangerous game for all. It will backfire on the ones propping these legislators up.Are you stating the comissioners or some one else in your last sentenceRepublicans need a senate majority to resolve this issue. The Dem led senate natural resources committee punted on conformations. Sportsmen have very few friejoritynd in the majority party.They had hearings for three- Smith, Linville and Anderson. Two of the three were confirmed(Smith and Linville) leaving one of the strongest hunter voices not confirmed and "sitting". The newest three Rowland, Ragan and Lemkuhl did not receive a hearing. This is political posturing, including infighting amongst consumptive users, not wildlife management or policy.
?
:tup:
Post by: Rainier10 on June 05, 2022, 09:26:02 PM
Listened to half so far, word salad to me, I’ve seen zero that makes sense! Anyone have a time I could forward to that makes any sense?? Even here in Mexico, my time is valuable, I just waisted an hour! Good thing it’s raining here.56 minutes in.
Post by: Special T on June 05, 2022, 09:44:57 PM
If you started at the 56min mark it wouldn't be so confusing.Listened to half so far, word salad to me, I’ve seen zero that makes sense! Anyone have a time I could forward to that makes any sense?? Even here in Mexico, my time is valuable, I just waisted an hour! Good thing it’s raining here.56 minutes in.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on June 06, 2022, 06:24:41 AM
Post by: timberfaller on June 06, 2022, 06:45:46 AM
A lot of bell ringing was done back in the 80's but no one wanted to listen or believe it would happen! oh well! :bash:
Post by: Ridgeratt on June 06, 2022, 07:09:14 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on June 06, 2022, 08:08:27 AM
Post by: MR5x5 on June 06, 2022, 08:17:10 AM
Post by: Rainier10 on June 06, 2022, 08:26:21 AM
Well I have listened to quite a bit of Rowland and Smiths ranting. To me it is evident that those 2 to want to have more input on the seasons, harvest quota, etc. Smith brought up no less than 3 times that she essentially didnt care squat about the hunters survey since only 4 % hunt. She also went on to pretty much say that cougar depredation didnt have a significant effect on Blues elk population but shed hunters, e bikes etc. I was glad to see that Commissioner Thornburn brought up the unfortunate attack on the 9 yr old girl. Especially since I emailed the commission about it.That was the impression I got. I feel like they should have applied for the WDFW not for the commission. It appears since they couldn't get hired at WDFW they were appointed to the commission and are now on a mission to get rid of WDFW.
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 06, 2022, 08:29:02 AM
Yet so many hunters continue to support/fund them through license purchases....
In principal I agree....but.
The reality is they would love nothing more for people to stop buying licenses and tags ..it would be the easy way for them to reduce opportunity....they have plenty of money from the general fund to keep their agenda moving. Our petty cash is just fun money for them.
Post by: Ridgerunner on June 06, 2022, 08:32:35 AM
If it is its typical left hypocrisy as in this video she says its important to know the background of what she is voting on when she clearly didn't have a clue in the earlier meetings.
Post by: MR5x5 on June 06, 2022, 08:48:45 AM
Yet so many hunters continue to support/fund them through license purchases....
In principal I agree....but.
The reality is they would love nothing more for people to stop buying licenses and tags ..it would be the easy way for them to reduce opportunity....they have plenty of money from the general fund to keep their agenda moving. Our petty cash is just fun money for them.
Not to argue, but do you know the funding source breakdown? I was under the impression that the license contribution was significant..?
Post by: GASoline71 on June 06, 2022, 08:50:40 AM
Yet so many hunters continue to support/fund them through license purchases....
In principal I agree....but.
The reality is they would love nothing more for people to stop buying licenses and tags ..it would be the easy way for them to reduce opportunity....they have plenty of money from the general fund to keep their agenda moving. Our petty cash is just fun money for them.
Exactly... taking a stand by not buying licenses will do nothing but shoot yourself in the foot. It sounds like a great thing to do to "stick it to the man", but in reality it doesn't help the cause.
Not buying a license because you are hunting in another state... I totally understand that.
Gary
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 06, 2022, 08:51:18 AM
Yet so many hunters continue to support/fund them through license purchases....
In principal I agree....but.
The reality is they would love nothing more for people to stop buying licenses and tags ..it would be the easy way for them to reduce opportunity....they have plenty of money from the general fund to keep their agenda moving. Our petty cash is just fun money for them.
Not to argue, but do you know the funding source breakdown? I was under the impression that the license contribution was significant..?
Off the top of my head..on average 15 percent range of the budget.
Post by: Karl Blanchard on June 06, 2022, 08:59:28 AM
and if there is no hunters buying licenses to worry about they can trim WDFW significantly so that money isn't needed. The end game for these people is no hunting. Not buying license is EXACTLY what they want. Its their intended goal.Yet so many hunters continue to support/fund them through license purchases....
In principal I agree....but.
The reality is they would love nothing more for people to stop buying licenses and tags ..it would be the easy way for them to reduce opportunity....they have plenty of money from the general fund to keep their agenda moving. Our petty cash is just fun money for them.
Not to argue, but do you know the funding source breakdown? I was under the impression that the license contribution was significant..?
Off the top of my head..on average 15 percent range of the budget.
Post by: idahohuntr on June 06, 2022, 09:16:54 AM
Isn't the commissioner Rowland the one that didn't even know there was a spring turkey season? Or thought that bighorn sheep were endangered? Or didn't even realize that you could buy a general tag and that the special permits were in addition?Yes - nearly all of them are clueless on hunting. Which is why it is so frustrating to listen to them discuss or vote on nuanced hunting related issues. It would be nice if they had at least a couple really solid hunters so they could have the expertise on the commission to frame and discuss a lot of this stuff. To be fair - other western states will stack these commissions with equally ignorant people - but at least they aren't anti-hunters.
If it is its typical left hypocrisy as in this video she says its important to know the background of what she is voting on when she clearly didn't have a clue in the earlier meetings.
Post by: Humptulips on June 06, 2022, 09:35:28 AM
Post by: Ghost Hunter on June 06, 2022, 10:24:27 AM
My buddy lives right next to Rowland just outside of Twisp. He says she is one of the biggest anti hunters around. We need to pressure the 2 to resign. If your not informed about hunting and fishing in WA state then really you have no business being on the commission
Any chance posting the address?
Generally only takes a couple minutes to find it. Some others might take a few more.
Post by: MR5x5 on June 06, 2022, 10:56:58 AM
Yet so many hunters continue to support/fund them through license purchases....
In principal I agree....but.
The reality is they would love nothing more for people to stop buying licenses and tags ..it would be the easy way for them to reduce opportunity....they have plenty of money from the general fund to keep their agenda moving. Our petty cash is just fun money for them.
Not to argue, but do you know the funding source breakdown? I was under the impression that the license contribution was significant..?
Off the top of my head..on average 15 percent range of the budget.
Thanks. I'd argue that holding a good portion of that 15% "hostage" would shine a light on the issue and give the hunting community a chance to make a stand and state their issues in a unified voice. Most people I know that don't hunt simply don't understand the nature of what is going on. When presented with the state of affairs wrt wolves, cats, bears, elk, deer, fish etc they are typically reasonable and understand the concept of active mgmt.
My $0.02
Post by: dreamingbig on June 06, 2022, 03:41:13 PM
I thought there goal was to let predators go unchecked so that there is nothing left to hunt.and if there is no hunters buying licenses to worry about they can trim WDFW significantly so that money isn't needed. The end game for these people is no hunting. Not buying license is EXACTLY what they want. Its their intended goal.Yet so many hunters continue to support/fund them through license purchases....
In principal I agree....but.
The reality is they would love nothing more for people to stop buying licenses and tags ..it would be the easy way for them to reduce opportunity....they have plenty of money from the general fund to keep their agenda moving. Our petty cash is just fun money for them.
Not to argue, but do you know the funding source breakdown? I was under the impression that the license contribution was significant..?
Off the top of my head..on average 15 percent range of the budget.
Right now it is a donation to a rather crappy product.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: ganghis on June 06, 2022, 04:39:15 PM
:bash:
Post by: Special T on June 06, 2022, 04:42:15 PM
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 06, 2022, 05:00:38 PM
Yet so many hunters continue to support/fund them through license purchases....
In principal I agree....but.
The reality is they would love nothing more for people to stop buying licenses and tags ..it would be the easy way for them to reduce opportunity....they have plenty of money from the general fund to keep their agenda moving. Our petty cash is just fun money for them.
Not to argue, but do you know the funding source breakdown? I was under the impression that the license contribution was significant..?
Off the top of my head..on average 15 percent range of the budget.
Thanks. I'd argue that holding a good portion of that 15% "hostage" would shine a light on the issue and give the hunting community a chance to make a stand and state their issues in a unified voice. Most people I know that don't hunt simply don't understand the nature of what is going on. When presented with the state of affairs wrt wolves, cats, bears, elk, deer, fish etc they are typically reasonable and understand the concept of active mgmt.
My $0.02
Sadly holding that percent hostage would only affect programs that are directly related to keeping the tradition alive. Outreach, Hunter's Ed, access maintenance and availability would be the first to go. Followed by enforcement, hatcheries and habitat management.
There is no cancel culture for agencies like wdfw. It would only affect the user group...guys and gals like you and me.
We need legislation to step in and fix the commission. Rules aren't being followed and or are being skirted.
Unfortunately our elected officials are worthless right now though....
The solution to the problem for me...I'm just moving out of State...
Post by: pickardjw on June 06, 2022, 05:09:58 PM
As sportsmen we need to do a better job killing predators. I'm as guilty as everyone else in this way. I've never killed a bear or cougar so I'm as guilty as the rest. Gonna need to re read Bozes bear book and get after it. We can kill 2 so killing the first one we shouldn't be to picky. :twocents:
I think I'm gonna pick up an electronic predator caller. Doug was just on the Exo podcast, and Phelp's podcast talking about calling bears. Hope to call some cats in too.
Post by: Ridgeratt on June 07, 2022, 06:58:28 AM
Post by: Dysfunctional Vet on June 07, 2022, 07:25:04 AM
How many feel when Inslee makes the new appointment's he will actually very from what he has chosen already? I think you are seeing the writing on the wall.To me it looks like it’s a race of the west coast to see who is the greatest *censored* state by banning hunting first. My money is on California and the rest will follow. As usual.
Post by: trophyhunt on June 07, 2022, 09:10:50 AM
Post by: GASoline71 on June 07, 2022, 09:19:58 AM
How many feel when Inslee makes the new appointment's he will actually very from what he has chosen already? I think you are seeing the writing on the wall.To me it looks like it’s a race of the west coast to see who is the greatest *censored* state by banning hunting first. My money is on California and the rest will follow. As usual.
I don't know if Cali would be a safe bet. The Cali game commission just told the HSUS to shove it during the HSUS attempt to shut down bear hunting in Cali earlier this Spring.
Gary
Post by: Special T on June 07, 2022, 09:59:31 AM
How many feel when Inslee makes the new appointment's he will actually very from what he has chosen already? I think you are seeing the writing on the wall.
Well here is the Rub...We know the kind Commissioners he wants, and we know that the RCW 77.04.030 has stipulations in it and they are not being meet. So who is in our bull pen? Who are the Pro sportsmen that are moderate Dems? Blake was likely overlooked because he would run rough shot all over the fools, but pressure could still be brought to the governor. Surely some past rural democrat county commissioners, or other positions, that are pro hunting can be found.
Say sportsmen get lucky and take hold of the senate, you now control the conformation process and get rid of HSUS shill Kevin Van DeWege. WHO are we gonna put up to represent us? Who can we find that would make it hard for the Govenor to refuse?
Post by: Ridgeratt on June 07, 2022, 10:14:16 AM
How many feel when Inslee makes the new appointment's he will actually very from what he has chosen already? I think you are seeing the writing on the wall.
Well here is the Rub...We know the kind Commissioners he wants, and we know that the RCW 77.04.030 has stipulations in it and they are not being meet. So who is in our bull pen? Who are the Pro sportsmen that are moderate Dems? Blake was likely overlooked because he would run rough shot all over the fools, but pressure could still be brought to the governor. Surely some past rural democrat county commissioners, or other positions, that are pro hunting can be found.
Say sportsmen get lucky and take hold of the senate, you now control the conformation process and get rid of HSUS shill Kevin Van DeWege. WHO are we gonna put up to represent us? Who can we find that would make it hard for the Govenor to refuse?
Not sure if Sportsman will take hold of the senate, as a group hunters make up less than 15 %. If you ask around you friend see just how many follow any of the news. An example of this. I am renting to a custodian for Dist 81. I asked him about the student who was arrested for threats to one of the schools. He had heard nothing about it. Lots of people are just tired of listening to any news what so ever.
How did that work for "us" on the increased cougar quotas? He did what he felt was in the best interest of the state. Just ask him.
Post by: Special T on June 07, 2022, 10:23:17 AM
How many feel when Inslee makes the new appointment's he will actually very from what he has chosen already? I think you are seeing the writing on the wall.
Well here is the Rub...We know the kind Commissioners he wants, and we know that the RCW 77.04.030 has stipulations in it and they are not being meet. So who is in our bull pen? Who are the Pro sportsmen that are moderate Dems? Blake was likely overlooked because he would run rough shot all over the fools, but pressure could still be brought to the governor. Surely some past rural democrat county commissioners, or other positions, that are pro hunting can be found.
Say sportsmen get lucky and take hold of the senate, you now control the conformation process and get rid of HSUS shill Kevin Van DeWege. WHO are we gonna put up to represent us? Who can we find that would make it hard for the Govenor to refuse?
Not sure if Sportsman will take hold of the senate, as a group hunters make up less than 15 %. If you ask around you friend see just how many follow any of the news. An example of this. I am renting to a custodian for Dist 81. I asked him about the student who was arrested for threats to one of the schools. He had heard nothing about it. Lots of people are just tired of listening to any news what so ever.
How did that work for "us" on the increased cougar quotas? He did what he felt was in the best interest of the state. Just ask him.
Well I was trying not to be so blunt, but the fact is Republicans tend to be friendlier than Dems on sportsmen issues. I believe Republicans will take the seats necessary to remove Van DeWege from the Chair of the Natural resources committee.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on June 07, 2022, 10:32:49 AM
Those 2 need to be on the ecology dept commission. they have no idea what the mission statement is and seem to be determined to :bash:change it! :bdid:
2 hours of mostly their ignorance I cant get back :bash:
Post by: Bushcraft on June 07, 2022, 01:16:49 PM
It's interesting to watch some of them squirm with Smith and Rowland.
To mix some idioms: They let the camel's nose in the tent and now the chickens have come home to roost.
The reason that Smith, Rowland, and other anti-hunting commissioners and staff want the public survey is that the survey questions are likely absurdly flawed which results in a WILDLY overly skewed response of the general public's interest and involvement in wildlife. At least they were in the past when I was on WDAC. It was all I could do to not laugh in the faces of the idiot staff and birds and butterfly wingnuts (Including Fred Koontz) that ignored the obvious flaws and gave it an overly weighted value for use in Department priorities.
Post by: Jake Dogfish on June 07, 2022, 01:36:51 PM
It is amazing to me to look at the resumes of Rowland and Smith and then see what dunces they are. The disconnect is amazing and discouraging.Unfortunately the other two recent Inslee appointees are equally clueless. Ragan mumbles and doesn’t seem to know anything about fishing and hunting. Lemkeul hides behind saying he’s a hunter, but doesn’t vote like one. :bash:
Post by: idahohuntr on June 07, 2022, 04:16:42 PM
I'm still holding like 3% hope that he's mostly a hunter who is just spineless and was told his appointment to the commission was predicated on voting down spring bear this year.It is amazing to me to look at the resumes of Rowland and Smith and then see what dunces they are. The disconnect is amazing and discouraging.Unfortunately the other two recent Inslee appointees are equally clueless. Ragan mumbles and doesn’t seem to know anything about fishing and hunting. Lemkeul hides behind saying he’s a hunter, but doesn’t vote like one. :bash:
If he keeps parroting Lorna and voting with her though...I look forward to going to an in person commission meeting and publicly asking him to stop calling himself a hunter, because it is incredibly disparaging to those of us who actually hunt and support the hunting heritage that has been the greatest conservation tool the world has ever seen.
Post by: Special T on June 07, 2022, 07:45:10 PM
I'm still holding like 3% hope that he's mostly a hunter who is just spineless and was told his appointment to the commission was predicated on voting down spring bear this year.It is amazing to me to look at the resumes of Rowland and Smith and then see what dunces they are. The disconnect is amazing and discouraging.Unfortunately the other two recent Inslee appointees are equally clueless. Ragan mumbles and doesn’t seem to know anything about fishing and hunting. Lemkeul hides behind saying he’s a hunter, but doesn’t vote like one. :bash:
If he keeps parroting Lorna and voting with her though...I look forward to going to an in person commission meeting and publicly asking him to stop calling himself a hunter, because it is incredibly disparaging to those of us who actually hunt and support the hunting heritage that has been the greatest conservation tool the world has ever seen.
I have heard that he has held a turkey and small game license and is a avid upland hunter. The Goone from Anacortes has had neither a hunting or fishing License and Rowland a fishing lic...but thats it.Not exactly a raving endorsement...
Post by: Dysfunctional Vet on June 07, 2022, 08:17:42 PM
I’m really surprised by that but it’s awesome they did. They really hate guns and anything hunting related in that state. AlGrew up there. One thing they always did right was fishing. They’d stock monster trout, up to 20lbs and the small ones were 2 pounds. None of these 8” guppies I get to catch here.How many feel when Inslee makes the new appointment's he will actually very from what he has chosen already? I think you are seeing the writing on the wall.To me it looks like it’s a race of the west coast to see who is the greatest *censored* state by banning hunting first. My money is on California and the rest will follow. As usual.
I don't know if Cali would be a safe bet. The Cali game commission just told the HSUS to shove it during the HSUS attempt to shut down bear hunting in Cali earlier this Spring.
Gary
Post by: Ridgeratt on June 08, 2022, 10:56:30 AM
How many feel when Inslee makes the new appointment's he will actually very from what he has chosen already? I think you are seeing the writing on the wall.
Well here is the Rub...We know the kind Commissioners he wants, and we know that the RCW 77.04.030 has stipulations in it and they are not being meet. So who is in our bull pen? Who are the Pro sportsmen that are moderate Dems? Blake was likely overlooked because he would run rough shot all over the fools, but pressure could still be brought to the governor. Surely some past rural democrat county commissioners, or other positions, that are pro hunting can be found.
Say sportsmen get lucky and take hold of the senate, you now control the conformation process and get rid of HSUS shill Kevin Van DeWege. WHO are we gonna put up to represent us? Who can we find that would make it hard for the Govenor to refuse?
Not sure if Sportsman will take hold of the senate, as a group hunters make up less than 15 %. If you ask around you friend see just how many follow any of the news. An example of this. I am renting to a custodian for Dist 81. I asked him about the student who was arrested for threats to one of the schools. He had heard nothing about it. Lots of people are just tired of listening to any news what so ever.
How did that work for "us" on the increased cougar quotas? He did what he felt was in the best interest of the state. Just ask him.
Well I was trying not to be so blunt, but the fact is Republicans tend to be friendlier than Dems on sportsmen issues. I believe Republicans will take the seats necessary to remove Van DeWege from the Chair of the Natural resources committee.
I "Dont" share your optimism that the 3 western counties will vote in and Republicans. I think they have grown found of what Inslee is feeding them and they like the taste. I hope that you prove me wrong, But just not feelin it.
I thought about being a little more blunt, but I may have been awarded a time out or sent to the guillotine.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on June 08, 2022, 11:25:04 AM
*censored*? Really?.......Mods......Better??
Post by: WWC on June 12, 2022, 03:24:45 PM
WFW Commission culture war continues
Fish and wildlife commissioners still arguing over hunting document
By Eric Barker of the Tribune Jun 3, 2022 Comments
https://lmtribune.com/outdoors/wfw-commission-culture-war-continues/article_92f93c07-d6d6-5366-9184-a36cf250b040.html?fbclid=IwAR2iGodRDW1dDCE4VqY-fxQJxyY3qbRWFyOEK-mr59IQS-ce4StZdW9U6BQ
Post by: wheels1 on June 12, 2022, 03:43:09 PM
Post by: KNOPHISH on June 12, 2022, 03:51:36 PM
Post by: Seabass on February 08, 2023, 06:19:08 PM
Post by: nwwanderer on February 08, 2023, 07:27:42 PM
Post by: harveymarv on February 08, 2023, 07:30:53 PM
commission@dfw.wa.gov
Lorna.Smith@dfw.gov.net
mjrowland@greatcat.net
this petition was from a while ago, but a few folks at least were willing to sign:
https://www.change.org/p/lorna-smith-demand-lorna-smith-resign-from-washington-dept-of-fish-and-wildlife-wdfw-commission-d4f70a10-ce34-431a-9e16-43e3d97c5995
Post by: Ghost Hunter on February 08, 2023, 08:03:56 PM
Post by: harveymarv on February 08, 2023, 08:30:56 PM
Just don't see them caving. Forced out under protest maybe.
I agree, but Koontz caved - did you think he would? I didn't...
Takes literally 2 minutes and zero dollars to write an email - took us just as long to post our replies here.
Post by: Ghost Hunter on February 08, 2023, 09:15:02 PM
Post by: jackelope on February 10, 2023, 03:12:04 PM
The whole episode is great stuff, but the Lorna Smith stuff starts around 42 minutes if I remember correctly.
https://www.youtube.com/live/Q-mSG32Bgx0?feature=share
Post by: snit on February 10, 2023, 08:57:31 PM
Post by: HillHound on February 11, 2023, 06:24:19 AM
Post by: bigtex on February 11, 2023, 06:59:03 AM
Well there you go a written confession from Lorna about her breaking state wildlife rules. Does that not disqualify you from being on the commission? Can A person with wildlife violations be appointed to the commission? Seems like they could be if they leave her on there. You can’t even be a master hunter if you’ve had a wild life violation in the last 10 years. And if you receive one while you are a master hunter you are stripped of your title. Why would this be different for the commission who makes all of our rules?Nothing in the law prohibits someone with a previous wildlife conviction from serving on the commission.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Post by: idahohuntr on February 11, 2023, 07:42:20 AM
Well there you go a written confession from Lorna about her breaking state wildlife rules. Does that not disqualify you from being on the commission? Can A person with wildlife violations be appointed to the commission? Seems like they could be if they leave her on there. You can’t even be a master hunter if you’ve had a wild life violation in the last 10 years. And if you receive one while you are a master hunter you are stripped of your title. Why would this be different for the commission who makes all of our rules?I vehemently disapprove of Lorna being on the commission and think her disdain for hunters, lack of knowledge on hunting/fishing issues, and contempt for people who disagree with her make her unfit to serve. That said...this barter thing...gimme a break. Hate to see this being a focal point of attack on her given it is so weak...it dilutes the more legitimate criticism for which she should be removed. Frankly, it plays right into her hand and makes it easier for her to summarily dismiss more legitimate criticism. :twocents:
Post by: MtnMuley on February 11, 2023, 07:49:12 AM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on February 11, 2023, 08:01:56 AM
Seems this one is not "previous" How about "active" :kneel:Well there you go a written confession from Lorna about her breaking state wildlife rules. Does that not disqualify you from being on the commission? Can A person with wildlife violations be appointed to the commission? Seems like they could be if they leave her on there. You can’t even be a master hunter if you’ve had a wild life violation in the last 10 years. And if you receive one while you are a master hunter you are stripped of your title. Why would this be different for the commission who makes all of our rules?Nothing in the law prohibits someone with a previous wildlife conviction from serving on the commission.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Post by: harveymarv on February 11, 2023, 08:08:20 AM
Subject: Invitation to Resign
Dear Commissioner Smith,
I would like to respectfully invite you to resign from the WDFW Commission, for the following (main) 3 reasons:
1. You have repeatedly propagated the false narratives of extremist anti-hunting groups, particularly regarding but not limited to the cancellation of the spring bear hunt. The spring bear hunt is not unethical. It is a subsistence and management hunt, not a trophy hunt. The extremely rare unintentional harvest of lactating sows resulting in orphaned cubs is nothing compared to the consumption of those same cubs by unharvested boars. Your dishonesty and misrepresentation on this matter has no place on the Commission.
2. You have repeatedly ignored the sound science and professional opinions of WDFW staff biologists in favor of your own untrained interpretation of data and have repeatedly asked staff for more data when sufficent data already exists for them to come to sound conclusions and recommendations. You do this as a tactic to further your biased agendas. Biased agendas and ignoring wildlife professionals will ultimately do great harm to Washington wildlife, and this tactic has no place on our Commission.
3. Your tactics and approach are divisive and contentious, and you have alienated the majority of hunters and tribal leaders in our state. Washington citizens need to be united if we are to protect our wild outdoors from the threats of habitat loss and climate change. Hunters and non-hunters alike will need to work together - both groups have a great deal to offer. Even if hunters are a population minority in the state, their contribution to habitat preservation and population recovery has been crucial in the past and will continue to be crucial in the future. Our WDFW needs Commissioners who can unite and lead, not divide and alienate.
In the (recent) words of Mitt Romney to George Santos - "You don't belong here". If you really care about Washington state wildlife please consider my invitation to resign from the WDFW Commission. I am not alone in this request:
https://www.change.org/p/lorna-smith-demand-lorna-smith-resign-from-washington-dept-of-fish-and-wildlife-wdfw-commission-d4f70a10-ce34-431a-9e16-43e3d97c5995
Post by: pianoman9701 on February 11, 2023, 08:19:13 AM
Post by: Special T on February 11, 2023, 10:06:05 AM
Well there you go a written confession from Lorna about her breaking state wildlife rules. Does that not disqualify you from being on the commission? Can A person with wildlife violations be appointed to the commission? Seems like they could be if they leave her on there. You can’t even be a master hunter if you’ve had a wild life violation in the last 10 years. And if you receive one while you are a master hunter you are stripped of your title. Why would this be different for the commission who makes all of our rules?Nothing in the law prohibits someone with a previous wildlife conviction from serving on the commission.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Has she been convicted? or is this an admission? if its an admission is that different? Is Chief Bear under obligation to investigate if asked to? If he allows this to go un investigated how are sportsmen supposed to react? Which rules are worth enforcing which are not? Am I allowed to barter my fish and game? Should I care about those "Small" rules if the leaders are except? Its illegal for me to pass a pole with a hooked fish to my kid. Perhaps my barb isnt crimped down hard enough? Does Enforcement want wholesale mutiny from sportsmen? This will go quite badly for the department if this is ignored.
Post by: Special T on February 11, 2023, 10:12:24 AM
Well there you go a written confession from Lorna about her breaking state wildlife rules. Does that not disqualify you from being on the commission? Can A person with wildlife violations be appointed to the commission? Seems like they could be if they leave her on there. You can’t even be a master hunter if you’ve had a wild life violation in the last 10 years. And if you receive one while you are a master hunter you are stripped of your title. Why would this be different for the commission who makes all of our rules?Nothing in the law prohibits someone with a previous wildlife conviction from serving on the commission.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Probably for the best but your inbox is full
Post by: bigtex on February 11, 2023, 10:46:08 AM
Sorry just cleared it out.Well there you go a written confession from Lorna about her breaking state wildlife rules. Does that not disqualify you from being on the commission? Can A person with wildlife violations be appointed to the commission? Seems like they could be if they leave her on there. You can’t even be a master hunter if you’ve had a wild life violation in the last 10 years. And if you receive one while you are a master hunter you are stripped of your title. Why would this be different for the commission who makes all of our rules?Nothing in the law prohibits someone with a previous wildlife conviction from serving on the commission.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Probably for the best but your inbox is full
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Post by: Special T on February 11, 2023, 11:04:32 AM
apply some pressure - email Smith and Rowland and demand their resignation. cc the WDFW commission email so it gets distributed to the whole commission. be specific about why, and be civil and professional. some form of pressure worked to get Koontz to resign.
commission@dfw.wa.gov
Lorna.Smith@dfw.gov.net
mjrowland@greatcat.net
this petition was from a while ago, but a few folks at least were willing to sign:
https://www.change.org/p/lorna-smith-demand-lorna-smith-resign-from-washington-dept-of-fish-and-wildlife-wdfw-commission-d4f70a10-ce34-431a-9e16-43e3d97c5995
I like where your head is at... Koontz was intelligent enough to be shamed into resigning. Im not sure the same assertion could be made about Lorna Smith.
Post by: harveymarv on February 11, 2023, 11:20:14 AM
Lorna.Smith@dfw.wa.gov
Post by: hunter399 on February 11, 2023, 11:43:47 AM
Skip those guys resigning.
Send the whole Commission to retirement.
Just allow WDFW to make rule changes.
Commission can just be a committee with no real power to make changes. Kinda like our comment period for changes,They can comment ,but really have no say or power on anything.
Post by: Buckhunter24 on February 11, 2023, 03:03:44 PM
Well there you go a written confession from Lorna about her breaking state wildlife rules. Does that not disqualify you from being on the commission? Can A person with wildlife violations be appointed to the commission? Seems like they could be if they leave her on there. You can’t even be a master hunter if you’ve had a wild life violation in the last 10 years. And if you receive one while you are a master hunter you are stripped of your title. Why would this be different for the commission who makes all of our rules?Nothing in the law prohibits someone with a previous wildlife conviction from serving on the commission.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Has she been convicted? or is this an admission? if its an admission is that different? Is Chief Bear under obligation to investigate if asked to? If he allows this to go un investigated how are sportsmen supposed to react? Which rules are worth enforcing which are not? Am I allowed to barter my fish and game? Should I care about those "Small" rules if the leaders are except? Its illegal for me to pass a pole with a hooked fish to my kid. Perhaps my barb isnt crimped down hard enough? Does Enforcement want wholesale mutiny from sportsmen? This will go quite badly for the department if this is ignored.
Been following this thread, first time I've ever heard this. I might be headed to the slammer :yike:
Post by: KevrosWanderin on February 11, 2023, 07:41:59 PM
Post by: bigtex on February 12, 2023, 08:25:35 AM
As far as Chief Bear being obligated to investigate if asked to does that mean anybody can contact him at anytime and ask him to investigate any and all claims? What happened to law enforcement officer discretion? Are we absolutely sure Chief Bear didn't advise Smith what she admitted to was illegal?Has she been convicted? or is this an admission? if its an admission is that different? Is Chief Bear under obligation to investigate if asked to? If he allows this to go un investigated how are sportsmen supposed to react? Which rules are worth enforcing which are not? Am I allowed to barter my fish and game? Should I care about those "Small" rules if the leaders are except? Its illegal for me to pass a pole with a hooked fish to my kid. Perhaps my barb isnt crimped down hard enough? Does Enforcement want wholesale mutiny from sportsmen? This will go quite badly for the department if this is ignored.Well there you go a written confession from Lorna about her breaking state wildlife rules. Does that not disqualify you from being on the commission? Can A person with wildlife violations be appointed to the commission? Seems like they could be if they leave her on there. You can’t even be a master hunter if you’ve had a wild life violation in the last 10 years. And if you receive one while you are a master hunter you are stripped of your title. Why would this be different for the commission who makes all of our rules?Nothing in the law prohibits someone with a previous wildlife conviction from serving on the commission.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
What Smith is claiming she does (bartering with neighbors in fish and wildlife) is a felony (RCW 77.15.260). There is not a prosecutor in this state who would take the felony case of someone trading venison/salmon/etc to their neighbor for fruit/vegetables/meals whatever they trade. The state's wildlife trafficking law is based on commercial level felony trafficking/sales cases, that's why it's a felony. The intent isn't to lock up every citizen who trades a bag of deer jerkey for a bag of smoked salmon with a felony charge. Lets face it, I'm sure many people on this forum having swapped bags of jerky, sausage, etc. on here, should they be charged with felonies? There is no lesser offense they can be charged with, if you swap/barter a bag of jerky to your friend/neighbor for a bag of smoked salmon it is a felony, there is no misdemeanor or infraction (ticket) that you can be charged with.
In no way am I defending Smith, in fact I wish Fish Hunt Northwest would've brought up the appropriate law (the RCW above) which would've shown how the act of bartering in fish/wildlife is a felony. Maybe "Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Admits to Felony Wildlife Crime" would be a bigger headline. It obviously paints a giant black eye on her that she is flat out admitting to committing a wildlife felony. I think some on here think with Smith's admission that WDFW Officers/county prosecutors are going to be pounding on her door to lock her up, it isn't going to happen.
Post by: Russ McDonald on February 12, 2023, 09:03:47 AM
Establish a diverse and fair nominating committee process for Washington Fish and Game Commission appointments.
Ensure that science is the primary driver of fish and wildlife management,
Place a 90 day limit to fill and confirm commission vacancies.
We need your help! Please respectfully send an email to Senator Van De Wege at Kevin.VanDeWege@leg.wa.gov requesting a hearing for Senate Bill 5675.
Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
Post by: baldopepper on February 12, 2023, 09:27:07 AM
Post by: Special T on February 12, 2023, 09:53:58 AM
SB5675
I admire the intent of the bill. In my opinion it has some major holes in it that prevent it from accomplishing what it sets out to do. Its lays the responsibility of the nomination committee in the Governor and Sen Van DeWeges hands. The same 2 folks that are not currently following the law OR being the necessary check and balance in the system. If passed this would put a hand picked buffer to take the criticism of both parties not doing their job. Another problem I see is definitions for each required position. What constitutes a sportsmen organization? does CNW constitute one?
I dont know if anyone could write up a bill that could be passed to fix this problem. The Governor IS a major part of the problem and he would have to sign any bill that would fix the problem. Since HE is the problem why would he sign anything that strips his ability to pack the commission with Animal Rights Activists?
I only see a couple of ways out of our predicament. 1 the lawsuit 2 elections
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5675.htm
Post by: hunter399 on February 12, 2023, 10:03:44 AM
I would imagine that a PDR to come up with the email took quite a while to get. That would explain why it was from MAY of last year.I agree.
SB5675
I admire the intent of the bill. In my opinion it has some major holes in it that prevent it from accomplishing what it sets out to do. Its lays the responsibility of the nomination committee in the Governor and Sen Van DeWeges hands. The same 2 folks that are not currently following the law OR being the necessary check and balance in the system. If passed this would put a hand picked buffer to take the criticism of both parties not doing their job. Another problem I see is definitions for each required position. What constitutes a sportsmen organization? does CNW constitute one?
I dont know if anyone could write up a bill that could be passed to fix this problem. The Governor IS a major part of the problem and he would have to sign any bill that would fix the problem. Since HE is the problem why would he sign anything that strips his ability to pack the commission with Animal Rights Activists?
I only see a couple of ways out of our predicament. 1 the lawsuit 2 elections
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5675.htm
That's why I said ,Commission needs to be gone.
We don't need a commission to set wildlife laws and rules in this state.
I'd be perfectly fine with WDFW setting rules based on science and needs of our state's wildlife.
Post by: Special T on February 12, 2023, 10:09:37 AM
I would imagine that a PDR to come up with the email took quite a while to get. That would explain why it was from MAY of last year.I agree.
SB5675
I admire the intent of the bill. In my opinion it has some major holes in it that prevent it from accomplishing what it sets out to do. Its lays the responsibility of the nomination committee in the Governor and Sen Van DeWeges hands. The same 2 folks that are not currently following the law OR being the necessary check and balance in the system. If passed this would put a hand picked buffer to take the criticism of both parties not doing their job. Another problem I see is definitions for each required position. What constitutes a sportsmen organization? does CNW constitute one?
I dont know if anyone could write up a bill that could be passed to fix this problem. The Governor IS a major part of the problem and he would have to sign any bill that would fix the problem. Since HE is the problem why would he sign anything that strips his ability to pack the commission with Animal Rights Activists?
I only see a couple of ways out of our predicament. 1 the lawsuit 2 elections
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5675.htm
That's why I said ,Commission needs to be gone.
We don't need a commission to set wildlife laws and rules in this state.
I'd be perfectly fine with WDFW setting rules based on science and needs of our state's wildlife.
Be careful what you ask for. We were without a commission before and didnt fair well as sportsmen. The governor just picked the director. Right now We have a great director Susewind, but what happens when he retires? He has 30 years in working for the state. I think this governor would LOVE to make some Animal rights activist the Director of WDFW to really drive it into the ground.
Post by: hunter399 on February 12, 2023, 10:58:23 AM
That probably gonna happen when our director retires,regardless if we have a Commission.I would imagine that a PDR to come up with the email took quite a while to get. That would explain why it was from MAY of last year.I agree.
SB5675
I admire the intent of the bill. In my opinion it has some major holes in it that prevent it from accomplishing what it sets out to do. Its lays the responsibility of the nomination committee in the Governor and Sen Van DeWeges hands. The same 2 folks that are not currently following the law OR being the necessary check and balance in the system. If passed this would put a hand picked buffer to take the criticism of both parties not doing their job. Another problem I see is definitions for each required position. What constitutes a sportsmen organization? does CNW constitute one?
I dont know if anyone could write up a bill that could be passed to fix this problem. The Governor IS a major part of the problem and he would have to sign any bill that would fix the problem. Since HE is the problem why would he sign anything that strips his ability to pack the commission with Animal Rights Activists?
I only see a couple of ways out of our predicament. 1 the lawsuit 2 elections
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5675.htm
That's why I said ,Commission needs to be gone.
We don't need a commission to set wildlife laws and rules in this state.
I'd be perfectly fine with WDFW setting rules based on science and needs of our state's wildlife.
Be careful what you ask for. We were without a commission before and didnt fair well as sportsmen. The governor just picked the director. Right now We have a great director Susewind, but what happens when he retires? He has 30 years in working for the state. I think this governor would LOVE to make some Animal rights activist the Director of WDFW to really drive it into the ground.
Post by: WWC on February 15, 2023, 08:18:19 PM
That probably gonna happen when our director retires,regardless if we have a Commission.I would imagine that a PDR to come up with the email took quite a while to get. That would explain why it was from MAY of last year.I agree.
SB5675
I admire the intent of the bill. In my opinion it has some major holes in it that prevent it from accomplishing what it sets out to do. Its lays the responsibility of the nomination committee in the Governor and Sen Van DeWeges hands. The same 2 folks that are not currently following the law OR being the necessary check and balance in the system. If passed this would put a hand picked buffer to take the criticism of both parties not doing their job. Another problem I see is definitions for each required position. What constitutes a sportsmen organization? does CNW constitute one?
I dont know if anyone could write up a bill that could be passed to fix this problem. The Governor IS a major part of the problem and he would have to sign any bill that would fix the problem. Since HE is the problem why would he sign anything that strips his ability to pack the commission with Animal Rights Activists?
I only see a couple of ways out of our predicament. 1 the lawsuit 2 elections
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5675.htm
That's why I said ,Commission needs to be gone.
We don't need a commission to set wildlife laws and rules in this state.
I'd be perfectly fine with WDFW setting rules based on science and needs of our state's wildlife.
Be careful what you ask for. We were without a commission before and didnt fair well as sportsmen. The governor just picked the director. Right now We have a great director Susewind, but what happens when he retires? He has 30 years in working for the state. I think this governor would LOVE to make some Animal rights activist the Director of WDFW to really drive it into the ground.
It is best not to be a fatalist. We have a means to bring balance and accountability back to the commission. Be strong and have faith, several dedicated sportsmen are working hard to preserve the heritage.
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”—Sir Winston Churchill.
Post by: elksnout on February 15, 2023, 08:54:01 PM
That probably gonna happen when our director retires,regardless if we have a Commission.I would imagine that a PDR to come up with the email took quite a while to get. That would explain why it was from MAY of last year.I agree.
SB5675
I admire the intent of the bill. In my opinion it has some major holes in it that prevent it from accomplishing what it sets out to do. Its lays the responsibility of the nomination committee in the Governor and Sen Van DeWeges hands. The same 2 folks that are not currently following the law OR being the necessary check and balance in the system. If passed this would put a hand picked buffer to take the criticism of both parties not doing their job. Another problem I see is definitions for each required position. What constitutes a sportsmen organization? does CNW constitute one?
I dont know if anyone could write up a bill that could be passed to fix this problem. The Governor IS a major part of the problem and he would have to sign any bill that would fix the problem. Since HE is the problem why would he sign anything that strips his ability to pack the commission with Animal Rights Activists?
I only see a couple of ways out of our predicament. 1 the lawsuit 2 elections
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5675.htm
That's why I said ,Commission needs to be gone.
We don't need a commission to set wildlife laws and rules in this state.
I'd be perfectly fine with WDFW setting rules based on science and needs of our state's wildlife.
Be careful what you ask for. We were without a commission before and didnt fair well as sportsmen. The governor just picked the director. Right now We have a great director Susewind, but what happens when he retires? He has 30 years in working for the state. I think this governor would LOVE to make some Animal rights activist the Director of WDFW to really drive it into the ground.
It is best not to be a fatalist. We have a means to bring balance and accountability back to the commission. Be strong and have faith, several dedicated sportsmen are working hard to preserve the heritage.
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”—Sir Winston Churchill.
So...there's a lot of speculation and comments between this thread and the other one under hunting topics. So I'm kinda lost a bit. How are sportsman being represented for Fridays meeting?
elksnout
Post by: Special T on February 15, 2023, 11:05:30 PM
That probably gonna happen when our director retires,regardless if we have a Commission.I would imagine that a PDR to come up with the email took quite a while to get. That would explain why it was from MAY of last year.I agree.
SB5675
I admire the intent of the bill. In my opinion it has some major holes in it that prevent it from accomplishing what it sets out to do. Its lays the responsibility of the nomination committee in the Governor and Sen Van DeWeges hands. The same 2 folks that are not currently following the law OR being the necessary check and balance in the system. If passed this would put a hand picked buffer to take the criticism of both parties not doing their job. Another problem I see is definitions for each required position. What constitutes a sportsmen organization? does CNW constitute one?
I dont know if anyone could write up a bill that could be passed to fix this problem. The Governor IS a major part of the problem and he would have to sign any bill that would fix the problem. Since HE is the problem why would he sign anything that strips his ability to pack the commission with Animal Rights Activists?
I only see a couple of ways out of our predicament. 1 the lawsuit 2 elections
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5675.htm
That's why I said ,Commission needs to be gone.
We don't need a commission to set wildlife laws and rules in this state.
I'd be perfectly fine with WDFW setting rules based on science and needs of our state's wildlife.
Be careful what you ask for. We were without a commission before and didnt fair well as sportsmen. The governor just picked the director. Right now We have a great director Susewind, but what happens when he retires? He has 30 years in working for the state. I think this governor would LOVE to make some Animal rights activist the Director of WDFW to really drive it into the ground.
It is best not to be a fatalist. We have a means to bring balance and accountability back to the commission. Be strong and have faith, several dedicated sportsmen are working hard to preserve the heritage.
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”—Sir Winston Churchill.
So...there's a lot of speculation and comments between this thread and the other one under hunting topics. So I'm kinda lost a bit. How are sportsman being represented for Fridays meeting?
elksnout
I'm gonna make the assumption that Fridays meeting is too direct of a assertion. 1st its just a presentation of amendments so some procedural stuff will have to take place, comments and such. 2nd many of the commissioners are ignoring all manner of rules, laws and procedures. This proposal seems to be another on the stack. 3rd I can only assume that WWC meant the lawsuit because that is the only chance at changing the Commission. According to what WWC has stated so far, and what I can asertain, a lawsuit is the only way to make a difference at this point.
Post by: huntnphool on February 16, 2023, 12:20:42 AM
That probably gonna happen when our director retires,regardless if we have a Commission.I would imagine that a PDR to come up with the email took quite a while to get. That would explain why it was from MAY of last year.I agree.
SB5675
I admire the intent of the bill. In my opinion it has some major holes in it that prevent it from accomplishing what it sets out to do. Its lays the responsibility of the nomination committee in the Governor and Sen Van DeWeges hands. The same 2 folks that are not currently following the law OR being the necessary check and balance in the system. If passed this would put a hand picked buffer to take the criticism of both parties not doing their job. Another problem I see is definitions for each required position. What constitutes a sportsmen organization? does CNW constitute one?
I dont know if anyone could write up a bill that could be passed to fix this problem. The Governor IS a major part of the problem and he would have to sign any bill that would fix the problem. Since HE is the problem why would he sign anything that strips his ability to pack the commission with Animal Rights Activists?
I only see a couple of ways out of our predicament. 1 the lawsuit 2 elections
https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2023-24/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5675.htm
That's why I said ,Commission needs to be gone.
We don't need a commission to set wildlife laws and rules in this state.
I'd be perfectly fine with WDFW setting rules based on science and needs of our state's wildlife.
Be careful what you ask for. We were without a commission before and didnt fair well as sportsmen. The governor just picked the director. Right now We have a great director Susewind, but what happens when he retires? He has 30 years in working for the state. I think this governor would LOVE to make some Animal rights activist the Director of WDFW to really drive it into the ground.
It is best not to be a fatalist. We have a means to bring balance and accountability back to the commission. Be strong and have faith, several dedicated sportsmen are working hard to preserve the heritage.
"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”—Sir Winston Churchill.
How are sportsman being represented for Fridays meeting?
elksnout
Bottom line, they’re not!