Post by: Practical Approach on January 28, 2025, 03:29:03 PM
https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary/?BillNumber=1685&Year=2025&Initiative=false
Post by: Mtnwalker on January 28, 2025, 03:49:26 PM
Post by: Karl Blanchard on January 28, 2025, 03:55:22 PM
I'm not the sharpest bulb in the drawer so maybe I'm reading this wrong, but basically they want the current commission and the governor (Ferguson) to appoint the new director who is now in charge of a bunch of stuff that the commission was previously in charge of... am I close here?That's how I read it as well. What could go wrong there :chuckle:
Post by: Rainier10 on January 28, 2025, 03:56:53 PM
((
practical knowledge of the habits and distribution of fish and
wildlife. The director shall supervise the administration and
operation of the department and perform the duties prescribed by law
and delegated by the commission. The director shall carry out the
basic goals and objectives prescribed under RCW 77.04.055.)
Post by: Mtnwalker on January 28, 2025, 03:58:56 PM
I'm not the sharpest bulb in the drawer so maybe I'm reading this wrong, but basically they want the current commission and the governor (Ferguson) to appoint the new director who is now in charge of a bunch of stuff that the commission was previously in charge of... am I close here?That's how I read it as well. What could go wrong there :chuckle:
A single source of more power appointed directly by the Governor's office. Color me skeptical
Post by: fishngamereaper on January 28, 2025, 04:04:31 PM
I really don't see a good outcome...
Post by: Rainier10 on January 28, 2025, 04:06:01 PM
Post by: full choke on January 28, 2025, 04:07:08 PM
I’m concerned this part is struck from section 2
((Persons eligible for appointment as director shall have)
practical knowledge of the habits and distribution of fish and
wildlife. The director shall supervise the administration and
operation of the department and perform the duties prescribed by law
and delegated by the commission. The director shall carry out the
basic goals and objectives prescribed under RCW 77.04.055.)
Pretty odd thing to strike out, unless you plan to destroy the way things have historically been run...
Post by: MeepDog on January 28, 2025, 04:07:33 PM
Wildlife, fish, and shellfish are the property of the state. The
((
perpetuate, and manage the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and
shellfish in state waters and offshore waters.
Post by: fishngamereaper on January 28, 2025, 04:11:30 PM
I'd like to congratulate Lorna Smith on her newly appointed position of Director of the wdfw... :mgun2: :stup: :mgun: :mor: :stirthepot: :ban:
Post by: bigtex on January 28, 2025, 05:07:35 PM
I'm not the sharpest bulb in the drawer so maybe I'm reading this wrong, but basically they want the current commission and the governor (Ferguson) to appoint the new director who is now in charge of a bunch of stuff that the commission was previously in charge of... am I close here?No.
What the bill does is make the WDFW Director a position appointed by the governor. The commissions authority will be gutted and essentially turned into an advisory commission for the Director.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Post by: Bushcraft on January 28, 2025, 05:23:05 PM
Post by: TriggerMike on January 28, 2025, 06:17:56 PM
So this is what option #2 in Ruckelshaus report was then?I'm not the sharpest bulb in the drawer so maybe I'm reading this wrong, but basically they want the current commission and the governor (Ferguson) to appoint the new director who is now in charge of a bunch of stuff that the commission was previously in charge of... am I close here?No.
What the bill does is make the WDFW Director a position appointed by the governor. The commissions authority will be gutted and essentially turned into an advisory commission for the Director.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Post by: Mtnwalker on January 28, 2025, 06:26:24 PM
I'm not the sharpest bulb in the drawer so maybe I'm reading this wrong, but basically they want the current commission and the governor (Ferguson) to appoint the new director who is now in charge of a bunch of stuff that the commission was previously in charge of... am I close here?No.
What the bill does is make the WDFW Director a position appointed by the governor. The commissions authority will be gutted and essentially turned into an advisory commission for the Director.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Got it. So the governor (Bob Ferguson) appoints a director who is bestowed with much of the authority that was previously held by the runaway commission. Said runaway commission then serves as an advisory role to the Ferguson-appointed Director. And here I was concerned :chuckle:
Post by: Special T on January 28, 2025, 06:48:49 PM
Post by: Humptulips on January 28, 2025, 10:28:00 PM
Post by: fishngamereaper on January 29, 2025, 06:30:00 AM
I was just reading the sportsman's alliance lawsuit reference their records request and the States obvious unwillingness to corporate....
Does the State know the commission is going to be revealed as crooked... trying to get plan B in motion... :dunno:
Post by: bearpaw on January 29, 2025, 06:50:59 AM
Hunting is already dyeing a slow death in Washington, this just gets the democrats where they want to be faster!
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on January 29, 2025, 08:17:51 AM
BOTH Sponsors are of the majority party. To me that says it all! :kneel: :bdid:
Post by: ghosthunter on January 29, 2025, 10:37:32 AM
One has to wonder if this is driven by the realization that the commission is fubar both from sportsman's view points and legal standing...
I was just reading the sportsman's alliance lawsuit reference their records request and the States obvious unwillingness to corporate....
Does the State know the commission is going to be revealed as crooked... trying to get plan B in motion... :dunno:
I believe hunting is just a small piece. I think the Democrats want every gun out of the state and eliminating hunting is just one step. Passing more and more gun laws ,restricting ranges, restricting ammo restricting ffl, restricting where you can shoot or carry. Making gun owners responsible for what a criminal might do.
All of it is an effort for your guns to go away. The 2 nd says you can bear. Not that you can shoot. The last of us that hold out will be regulated to dark rooms where we can handle our guns and tell stories.
Post by: baldopepper on January 29, 2025, 11:15:39 AM
Post by: bearpaw on January 29, 2025, 11:23:38 AM
I think you need to be careful painting everyone with the same brush. I have friends who are basically Ds who have been actively writing and working against restrictive gun laws and complaining about the commission. They chose not to vote in the govoner election. On the other hand my neighbors on both sides of my home are very strong, quite conservative republicans. They are very much in favor of strong gun control thinking it will curb the violent crime they continually see in the news. Seems around me that the gun issue crosses party lines with a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation out there.
No doubt there are a few exceptions to anything, but by and large its democrats who are writing these laws and passing them, it's not Republicans! :twocents:
Post by: baldopepper on January 29, 2025, 12:03:51 PM
Post by: Jake Dogfish on January 29, 2025, 01:15:47 PM
Post by: Rainier10 on January 29, 2025, 01:19:14 PM
This bill would work out poorly for hunters and fishers. :bdid:That’s what I think as well.
Post by: Mtnwalker on January 29, 2025, 01:29:16 PM
I think you need to be careful painting everyone with the same brush. I have friends who are basically Ds who have been actively writing and working against restrictive gun laws and complaining about the commission. They chose not to vote in the govoner election. On the other hand my neighbors on both sides of my home are very strong, quite conservative republicans. They are very much in favor of strong gun control thinking it will curb the violent crime they continually see in the news. Seems around me that the gun issue crosses party lines with a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation out there.
No doubt there are a few exceptions to anything, but by and large its democrats who are writing these laws and passing them, it's not Republicans! :twocents:
Not all democrats are anti-hunting, but the overwhelming majority of anti-hunters are democrat. This is not an opinion
Post by: Tbar on January 29, 2025, 06:42:27 PM
I think you need to be careful painting everyone with the same brush. I have friends who are basically Ds who have been actively writing and working against restrictive gun laws and complaining about the commission. They chose not to vote in the govoner election. On the other hand my neighbors on both sides of my home are very strong, quite conservative republicans. They are very much in favor of strong gun control thinking it will curb the violent crime they continually see in the news. Seems around me that the gun issue crosses party lines with a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation out there.
No doubt there are a few exceptions to anything, but by and large its democrats who are writing these laws and passing them, it's not Republicans! :twocents:
Not all democrats are anti-hunting, but the overwhelming majority of anti-hunters are democrat. This is not an opinion
@bigtex is this good bill? I personally do not think so and am very skeptical. I do not support.I'm not the sharpest bulb in the drawer so maybe I'm reading this wrong, but basically they want the current commission and the governor (Ferguson) to appoint the new director who is now in charge of a bunch of stuff that the commission was previously in charge of... am I close here?No.
What the bill does is make the WDFW Director a position appointed by the governor. The commissions authority will be gutted and essentially turned into an advisory commission for the Director.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Post by: bigtex on January 30, 2025, 07:11:56 AM
Not a good bill in my opinion. I, like others, still think the commission is the best route. However, the commisison needs to be revamped. This could be hunting/fishing license requirements, individuals supported by certain industries, etc.I think you need to be careful painting everyone with the same brush. I have friends who are basically Ds who have been actively writing and working against restrictive gun laws and complaining about the commission. They chose not to vote in the govoner election. On the other hand my neighbors on both sides of my home are very strong, quite conservative republicans. They are very much in favor of strong gun control thinking it will curb the violent crime they continually see in the news. Seems around me that the gun issue crosses party lines with a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation out there.
No doubt there are a few exceptions to anything, but by and large its democrats who are writing these laws and passing them, it's not Republicans! :twocents:
Not all democrats are anti-hunting, but the overwhelming majority of anti-hunters are democrat. This is not an opinion@bigtex is this good bill? I personally do not think so and am very skeptical. I do not support.I'm not the sharpest bulb in the drawer so maybe I'm reading this wrong, but basically they want the current commission and the governor (Ferguson) to appoint the new director who is now in charge of a bunch of stuff that the commission was previously in charge of... am I close here?No.
What the bill does is make the WDFW Director a position appointed by the governor. The commissions authority will be gutted and essentially turned into an advisory commission for the Director.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Post by: bearhunter99 on January 30, 2025, 10:59:33 AM
Post by: blackdog on January 30, 2025, 02:23:45 PM
Post by: Tbar on January 30, 2025, 03:09:11 PM
99 percent chance that this bill doesn’t pass.99% chance there's another about to drop.
Post by: Practical Approach on January 30, 2025, 04:42:59 PM
So, you are saying there is a chance one won't. :chuckle:99 percent chance that this bill doesn’t pass.99% chance there's another about to drop.
Post by: CJ1962 on January 30, 2025, 05:27:52 PM
So this is what option #2 in Ruckelshaus report was then?I'm not the sharpest bulb in the drawer so maybe I'm reading this wrong, but basically they want the current commission and the governor (Ferguson) to appoint the new director who is now in charge of a bunch of stuff that the commission was previously in charge of... am I close here?No.
What the bill does is make the WDFW Director a position appointed by the governor. The commissions authority will be gutted and essentially turned into an advisory commission for the Director.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
Yes this is Option 2.
Option 1: Maintain the Status Quo - AKA do nothing
Option 2: Establish WDFW as a Cabinet Agency
Option 3: Maintain the Commission, but Address the Following Issues with Comprehensive, Simultaneous Reforms
Anti hunters want option 2 and this Bill. As hunters we should want option 3. IMO
https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/wdfw-organizational-review-final-report.pdf
More detail on options are on page 46.
Post by: Rutnbuxnbulls on February 03, 2025, 08:30:03 AM
Copy and paste into your browser. We can directly influence or at least give them our two cents.
You can click on the "Send a Comment..." tab and send comments directly to your district officials.
Keep it professional of course and state that we want option 3 of the Ruckleshous Report.
Thanks!