Lawsuit Synopsis
I. Problem.
The current Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission (Commission) is not abiding by RCW 77.04.012. This puts cattlemen, ranchers, agriculture, private property owners, hunters, commercial fishermen, recreational fishermen, and all consumptive users in a terrible position.
RCW 77.04.012.
Mandate of department and commission.
Wildlife, fish, and shellfish are the property of the state. The commission, director, and the department shall preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish in state waters and offshore waters.
The department shall conserve the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish resources in a manner that does not impair the resource. In a manner consistent with this goal, the department shall seek to maintain the economic well-being and stability of the fishing industry in the state. The department shall promote orderly fisheries and shall enhance and improve recreational and commercial fishing in this state.
The commission may authorize the taking of wildlife, food fish, game fish, and shellfish only at times or places, or in manners or quantities, as in the judgment of the commission does not impair the supply of these resources.
The commission shall attempt to maximize the public recreational game fishing and hunting opportunities of all citizens, including juvenile, disabled, and senior citizens.
Recognizing that the management of our state wildlife, food fish, game fish, and shellfish resources depends heavily on the assistance of volunteers, the department shall work cooperatively with volunteer groups and individuals to achieve the goals of this title to the greatest extent possible.
Nothing in this title shall be construed to infringe on the right of a private property owner to control the owner's private property.
The current Commission blatantly ignores its responsibilities under the legislative mandate.
II. The problem is significant.
The Commission has, in the past, consistently ignored the legislative mandate, causing Commissioner Don McIsaac to resign from the Commission in disgust. The Commission voted 5 – 4 to ban all spring bear hunting. McIsaac said in his resignation letter:
“Just as the broad spectrum of biodiversity provides stability and strength to a robust natural ecosystem, a Commission composed of informed individuals with diverse opinions and different areas of specialized expertise in the field of natural resources conservation and management can provide stability and success to fulfilling the Commission’s legislative mandate. I urge you to consider such diversity as you consider the future of the Commission,” McIsaac wrote. That edict from state lawmakers was on his mind this past Friday as the commission voted 5-4 to ban the “recreational” hunting of bears in spring.
“Going to zero is not in the mandate of the commission,” McIsaac stated.
This is just the tip of the iceberg.
A. Tino Villaluz, the wildlife program manager for the Swinomish Indian Community, took issue with two of the Commissioners, Lorna Smith’s, and Fred Koontz’s “wanton disregard of the wildlife profession.” And yesterday, after a briefing on the dire straits faced by the Blue Mountains elk herd that has fallen to its lowest levels in 30-plus years and is not responding to sharply decreased antlerless tag levels, Smith and Koontz essentially argued, what crisis, let’s just lower the goalposts on the population objective and consider reducing hunting opportunities even further instead. Villaluz, pointing to treaty hunting rights and necessary pragmatic wildlife management in the West’s smallest state with the second highest human population, said, “The arbitrary protection of predators cannot continue.” He said that Smith and Koontz were showing “a heavy bias to first foods,” which he said for him is ungulates, and he said that it equated to “white privilege.”
B. Even though the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) staff showed that the science supported a limited-entry spring bear hunt, the Commission voted it down on a 5 – 4 vote on March 19, 2022. WDFW worked hard to show the Commission the necessity of a spring bear hunt, but the Commission voted it down anyway.
C. On Friday, November 18, 2022, The Commission voted to end “recreational hunting of black bears in the spring.” This will be devastating to the timber industry who lose millions of dollars to damage to trees from black bears in the spring. As Commissioner McIsaac said in his resignation, “Going to zero is not in the mandate of the commission.”
D. The Commission is of the mindset to protect large predators. The state is being overrun with cougars, black bears, and wolves. The animal-rights mindset is having a devastating effect on ungulate populations, which is a crushing blow to the hunting, ranching, agricultural, and rural communities.
1. With declining ungulate populations, large predators don’t turn vegetarian, they turn to livestock for their food source. Predation on livestock increases.
2. When ungulate populations decline, hunting seasons close, hunting opportunities plummet. Hunters quit hunting.
3. Rural communities that depend on hunters’ dollars lose out. Hunters spend $370 million dollars in Washington annually, over $163 million on trip related expenses, a $614 million dollar ripple effect.
4. The Commission is based on the false science of single specie management. Wildlife must be managed as a whole. Prey species must be managed in conjunction with the predators that prey upon them with the emphasis on the females of the species and the neonates.
5. In a Blue Mountain calf study, 125 calves were collared; there were two capture mortalities and seven dropped collars. Only 11 calves survived 150 days. There were 105 mortalities, 77 of those due to predation. Cougars were responsible for 70% of the calf loss. Cougar, bear, and wolves were responsible for another 20%, so large predators were responsible for 90% of the documented calf loss.
E. We have had Commissioners like Tim Regan say they are afraid to go out in the woods because of hunters and hunting opportunities need to be curtailed.
III. The problem is inherent.
The problem is part of the system and will not go away on its own unless we change something. This means that we need to take significant action.
A. The Governor is an animal-rights activist. When Jay Inslee was in Congress, during the ten years he served according to the Congressional Record out of 435 members of Congress, he was dead last on sportsmen’s issues. He has kept this up on wolves, telling WDFW to concentrate on non-lethal methods on wolves, while ranchers are being devastated by wolves.
B. The Governor’s Senior Policy Advisor on Natural Resources, Ruth Musgrave, is an ardent animal-rights activist. She worked for the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators for ten years and was a board member of the radical animal-rights group Defenders of Wildlife.
C. The Commission is out of balance with five environmental/animal-rights members controlling the nine-member Commission. Barbara Baker, Tim Regan, Lorna Smith, Melanie Rowland, and John Lehmkuhl solidly control the Commission.
1. This is illegal per RCW 77.04.040
RCW 77.04.040
Commission—Qualifications of members.
Persons eligible for appointment as members of the commission shall have general knowledge of the habits and distribution of fish and wildlife and shall not hold another state, county, or municipal elective or appointive office. In making these appointments, the governor shall seek to maintain a balance reflecting all aspects of fish and wildlife, including representation recommended by organized groups representing sportfishers, commercial fishers, hunters, private landowners, and environmentalists. Persons eligible for appointment as fish and wildlife commissioners shall comply with the provisions of chapters 42.52 and * 42.17 RCW.
2. The Governor, nor anyone in the Governor’s office has reached out to the hunting, fishing, ranching, agricultural, or private landowner community for our recommendations on the Commission.
3. The Governor’s office blatantly flaunts the law in regard to the Commission, stacking the Commission in radical environmentalist/animal-rightists favor.
D. Our citizen safeguard in the state senate is worthless. The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission is the only board or commission in Washington State where Commissioners can sit unconfirmed. There is no statutory requirement to confirm a commissioner, they can sit their entire term unconfirmed. An example of this is Commissioner Miranda Wecker who served on the Commission for 18 years, all of them unfirmed.
E. Even if the state senate would confirm the problem would still be inherent. The Chair of the Senate Natural Resources Committee is a HSUS “Legislator of the Year” in Senator Keven VanDeWege. The other three members: Jesse Salomon, Christine Rolfes, and Mark Stanford are all heavy animal-rights supporters. The state senate is under heavy Democratic control. Last year the Senate Natural Resources Committee voted to recommend the most radical of the animal-rights Commissioners, Lorna Smith, on a straight party line vote 4 – 3. She did not get confirmed by the state senate as session ended.
IV. The only solution is suing the Governor’s office to bring balance to the Commission.
The state’s two largest construction trade associations, the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW) and the Associated General Contractors of Washington (AGC) have filed a lawsuit to hold the governor accountable for not following the law in making his most recent appointments to the State Building Code Council (SBCC). The builders won this case in a settlement out of court.
A. This shows a consistent history of not following the law and not following the balance doctrine.
B. We have no legislative recourse.
C. Ten years ago, two leaders of the cattle industry and a leader of hunting community met with the top natural resources attorney in the state. This attorney told this group that legislators, the Commission, and the Governor’s Office give us no respect is that we never sue. This attorney said that we never play hardball. This attorney said that the tribes, the environmental groups, and the animal-rights groups all sued. This attorney said that if we just filed an intent to sue, we probably make the other side faint and gain instant respect. This attorney is no longer in natural resources law.
V The call to action.
A. Join WWC.
http://w4wc.org/membership.html This lawsuit will cost money and we need a diverse group of sportsmen to back this effort.
B. Convince other organizations to sign on to the lawsuit. Sportsmen need a wide variety of sportsmen related groups to publicly back this. Sportsmen have been clamoring for some one to lead the way. We are but we cannot do it alone.
