summit daWg

Here we are 2 years Later and now gagwhore is asking for it, Please respond. I would change the thread title if I could.



WE need to respond!!
















.ExternalClass .EC_ulink
{font-size:10pt;font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;}
.ExternalClass TD
{font-size:10pt;font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;}







Early in February, we warned you about Senate Bill 5127, an attempt to silence your voice in Washington"™s fisheries management by gutting the Fish and Wildlife Commission"™s authority to manage our fisheries. Despite your overwhelming opposition as shown by your 4,600 e-mails and letters, this dangerous bill has passed out of the Natural Resources Committee and was actually made worse.
Attached is a comprehensive summary of the specific changes Substitute Senate Bill (SSB) 5127 would enact. The goal of SSB 5127 is to take power from the people of the state and the Commission and centralize it in one committee of the Senate in order to better serve influential commercial fishing interests. These same interests are pushing this bill through so they can reverse the science and conservation-based approach of your current Fish and Wildlife Commissioners.

The vote of the people formed the Fish and Wildlife Commission. Not only would SSB 5127 end the Fish & Wildlife Commission as you know it, but the bill contains an emergency clause that prohibits citizens from gathering signatures to put it on the ballot for a vote of the people. Does this sound like they respect democracy? Are they looking out for you or the needs of the resource?
Do not allow this power grab by a select few succeed in undoing the Commission or your ability to have a say in the management of our fish and wildlife resources. You can sit by and watch, or you can make your voice be heard. Click on the link below to take action now!



Click the link below to take action on this issue.:
http://www.votervoice.net/link/forward/ccapnw147694.aspx

[/align][/align][/align][/align][/align][/align][/align] [/align][/align][/align][/align][/align][/align][/align]

var PS = "96690";





[/align][/align][/align][/align]













[/align][/align]

summit daWg

Sent this to my reps. and senator plus a couple other close ones and Frank Chopp. This is my first reply (and I'm not even in her district. I'll bet you the chopper ignores mePrivacy





[/align][/align]


[/align][/align]












[/align]
RE: Vote NO on SSB 5127
[/align][/align]
Senator
March 11, 2009

Re: SSB 5127 Relating to the governance of the department of fish and wildlife.


Thank you for your email in opposition to SSB 5127. I will be voting "no."

Best Wishes,


Pam Roach
State Senator


-----Original Message----
To: Roach, Sen. Pam
Subject: Vote NO on SSB 5127

Senator Roach:

Please oppose SSB 5127 which just passed out of the Senate Natural Resources Committee.
This bill guts the voter-mandated Fish and Wildlife Commission and ends the meaningful participation of Washington citizens in the management of our fish and wildlife resources. The legislation prevents citizens from influencing the policies and rules adopted by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. If this bill should come to you for a vote, please vote No!

The current Fish and Wildlife Commission has taken bold steps to put conservation and science first in Washington's fisheries management -- steps that benefit the resources but threaten the status quo for industrial users.

Their legislation has nothing to do with government reform and/or trimming budgets. The goal of SSB 5127 is to substitute the desires of a select few for the will of the public and the needs of our fish and wildlife. I hope you and your fellow members of the Senate will recognize this power grab for what it is and prevent SSB 5127 from becoming law.

Please oppose SSB 5127 should it come before you for a vote. Thank you.






















[/align][/align]

summit daWg

By now I’m sure you have received multiple messages from CCA and are fully aware of the dangerous Senate Bill 5127, which would gut the Fish and Wildlife Commission. This bill passed out of the Senate last week and is now assigned to the House Natural Resources Committee. CCA is leading the opposition to this dangerous legislation and we need your help.
Unlike our prior Action Alerts, this message is only going to select CCA members and supporters that live in the districts with representatives who serve on this committee. You are receiving this message because your state representative is part of the 13-member Natural Resource committee.
For more background information on this issue, please visit our website and review the Briefing Document on SB5127 posted on the homepage.
To quickly send a pre-drafted message to your state Representative, please click on the link below. As always, please consider adding some personal comments to the text to increase its effectiveness with your representative.
Remember, government (and our fish and wildlife resources) goes to those who show up.



Click the link below to take action on this issue.:
http://www.votervoice.net/link/forward/ccapnw161837.aspx

summit daWg

From Hunting washington Forums



approving 5127 (Read 220 times)



Jerry Gutzwilers response to the HHC letter approving 5127
[/align]« on: March 18, 2009, 10:21:41 AM »
[/align]


[/align]

[hr]


First of all, most of you dont know, but HHC-Pac Board that represents Washingtonians for Wildlife Conservation, took a unanimous vote to support the original SSB5127 on March 1,2009 Please do not contact those organizations. They have already been contacted and have begun to do their will. I want to ADD that most of the groups on the list did not know about the HHC vote and letter.
Jerrys and a brother belong to one of those groups. There are other influential members of conservation groups who are members of other groups. They already know what Jerry knows.

(Feel free to Share)
TO HUNTERS HERITAGE COUNCIL COMMUNICATION FROM MARCH 2, 2009

This letter is being written in response to a communication put out to hunters across Washington State by, or at least signed by, the Executive Committee of the Hunters Heritage Council (HHC). I’m responding to this communication because it contains information and opinion that are not only false but potentially very damaging to Washington’s wildlife management and the management of habitats that support these animals. It has taken the current Fish and Wildlife Commission nearly four years to develop and implement policies, goals and objective that move the Department in a positive direction relative to the management of these resources.

Until January 2008, the Department never had meaningful measurable goals and objectives for managing the state’s game herds since the merger of Departments of Fish and Game. As an example, the current Commission set goals for the Department that focus on getting all 10 elk herds in the state to their respective target population objectives. Currently, six of 10 fall short of their objective. Likewise, there are measures for other wildlife species and fish. These goals and objectives are public information and can be accessed through the Commission secretary in Olympia. The Commission has consistently focused on improving the performance of the Department of Fish and Wildlife, especially in areas where we believed that the Department has not performed well.

During my years on the Commission, I and other Commissioners felt that the Department’s Wildlife Program had serious problems and needed strategic direction. In its role as policy setting body for the Department, the Commission reviews and approves the long term strategy for wildlife—the Wildlife Management Plan. That plan is updated every six years. We were asked to approve a Plan prepared for 2008. The Commission did not approve the first three drafts of this document because it lacked action steps, goals, and other critical details to assure accountability and wildlife herd improvements. The Commission’s Wildlife Committee spent long hours repeatedly making comments to see that the Plan would provide the substantive guidance needed by the Wildlife Biologists to improve wildlife conditions over the next six years. The Six year Wildlife Management Plan now insures that the Department is held accountable for positive trends in wildlife management.

Another area of emphasis by the current Fish and Wildlife Commission has been public education and communication. The Department has made some improvements in this area but there is still a long way to go. There are goals and objectives for these activities that the Commission is monitoring and pressing the interim Director to achieve. The Department’s record in developing working relationships with sports organizations, schools and universities and other stakeholder groups needs to be greatly improved. Again, this has been a continuing emphasis of the Commission on the Department's leadership. Publicly available goals and objectives and policy statements are available for those that would like to examine them and even input to them.

The accusation in the HHC communication that citizens testifying before the Commission are treated poorly and that their input is rarely reflected in decisions is simply not true. When I chaired the Commission, I asked people to cease their testimony only when their allotted time had ended. In rare instances, citizens testifying before the Commission were argumentative and asked to cease their testimony. These occasions occurred very infrequently. Generally, public comments are heard, appreciated and the speakers thanked by the Commission. Further, between Commission meetings, Commissioners spend a lot of time reading e-mails and letters and answering telephone calls from interested constituents. These communications are also weighed into discussions leading up to policy development. The access to decision makers now provided by the Commission process will be essentially eliminated if SSB 5127 passes.

The HHC document indicates that there were “several instances where members of the Commission have, or are, engaged in rule making-related activity that attacks one user group over another.” Frankly, who ever authored this statement needs to be held accountable for it. It's not true!

The inference that Fish and Wildlife Commissioners intimidate staff and manipulate regulations for their personal agendas is a strong charge and cannot be substantiated, to my knowledge. However, there have been times when individual Commissioners have known that the truth was not accurately provided by staff . Biased wildlife staff presentations including errors of omission and /or commission are a serious concern for the Commission. Staff presentations should always be accurate, unbiased and credible to provide solid foundation for policy development. Some Legislators have made it known to the Commission that they see this as an issue which threatens the integrity of the process. At times, Commissioners have expressed their frustration to staff and have discussed this problem with the Director. I don't consider that as intimidation or manipulation. Rather, the examples above high light some of the wildlife staff problems that need to be remedied.

Currently, the Commission has nine member positions, when fully staffed. Given the diversity and complexity of wildlife and fish issues in Washington and the population of the state (6.8mm), the workload is more than full for the members of this volunteer Commission. The incumbents are citizens of the state with diverse interests and experience. They work hard to understand the many diverse issues associated with wildlife and fish management and are committed to doing the best job possible in developing policies and guidance for the Department.

Actions of the current Commission have, in general, been very positive for the hunting community, although not always apparent and high profile. If SB 5127 is passed and the Commission responsibility and authority over the Director reduced, hunters will be extremely disappointed in the results. Since 1995, Referendum 45 has provided an opportunity for “the voice of the people” and it is misleading and irresponsible to insinuate otherwise. While not perfect, I believe that the current Commission system is a far more effective policy and guidance approach for the Department than placement of the agency in the Governor's Cabinet. It is, in fact, vastly more responsive to wildlife and fish issues and to the people of Washington than a Director appointed by and accountable only to the Governor ever could be. Think about it! That is why this People's Referendum passed by a sizable margin (For – 809,083, Against – 517,433) in November, 1995.

If SB 5127 passes and policy and Director reporting are placed with the Governor's office, subsequent policy development for fish and wildlife will be strongly influenced by tribal and commercial fishing interests and as hunters, you should understand those implications. Further, the Governor's staff currently is anti-hunting. Will any of these groups (tribal, commercial fishery, or Governor's staff ) advance the interests of the non-tribal hunting community in Washington?

Lastly, I'd like to discuss why the HHC communication supporting SB5127 was really brought to the hunting community for support. Senator Jacobsen, Chair of the Senate Ocean and Natural Resources Committee, has opposed the current Commission since it was appointed by Governor Gregoire in 2005. From the beginning of my term, the Senator viewed our Commission as a threat to the dominance of the commercial fishery in Washington The Senator has a number of constituents in the Ballard area that are commercial fishermen or otherwise vested in that industry. In 2008, the Commission worked to resolve Salmon fishing issues between recreational and commercial fishers on the Columbia River. The result of this work was a move in toward conservation of wild salmon that did not set well with commercial fishers. This inspired Senator Jacobsen to develop legislation in the form of SB 5127. By reducing the Commissions responsibility/authority through SB 5127, he is securing the interests of the commercial fishing industry. The Bill, as written, would restrict or eliminate public input on wildlife management and recreational fishing issues. Future policy would be directed out of the Governor's Office and influenced primary by input from the Governor's anti hunting staff, tribes and commercial fishing interests.

Unfortunately, whoever drafted this biased and untruthful communication that the HHC Executive Committee has signed and distributed has appealed to the hunting community to act against the very things that it wants to see from the Department and the Commission. I ask you to strongly consider distributing this message to set the record straight. The person/persons that provided input to the content of the HHC letter had an alternative purpose in mind and that was to protect the Senator’s special interest clients and advance the tribe’s agenda by stripping the Commission's authority. It was not intended to improve the agenda of the hunting community or wildlife. If SB 5127 passes the Director will be selected by the Governor and be directed by a governor's staff that is generally less informed about wildlife and fish issues) as well as pressured by strong tribal influence and the commercial fishery interests in Washington. Contact your senator and representatives today as well as Governor Gregoire. NO ON SB 5127!

I'd be happy to discuss any part of this or other issues relating to the Department or the Commission of Fish and Wildlife.

Respectfully,
Jerry Gutzwiler
Immediate past Chair, DFW Commission
Prior Commissioner
Ph. Edited by poster
e-mail: [email protected]
[/align]

summit daWg

More talking to myself..... From hunting washington.com (again)






Posts: 58




[/align]






Washington Archery Coalition position on SB 5127
[/align]« on: March 17, 2009, 08:34:35 AM »
[/align]


[/align]

[hr]


ACTION ALERT from the Washington Archery Coalition:

My Fellow Outdoors Enthusiast,

It has become evident over the course of the past ten days that a potentially devastating attack on our ability to participate in the hunting season-setting processes comes from Senate Bill 5127. It was passed by the Senate on March 12 and is now in the House Natural Resources Committee.

This bill would wipe out the safeguards that Referendum 45, which was passed by an overwhelming majority of the voters in 1995, put into place. If SB 5127 becomes law it would reconstruct the Fish & Wildlife Commission into a mere advisory board, and give the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) the total authority to set our hunting seasons without the public input process we currently have.

For the record the commissioners aren’t raking in big bucks by serving. They are paid a hundred bucks a day for the meetings and get their room, board and gas money covered. The reason good people are attracted to serving is that the position is one of great responsibility and importance because the Director of the WDFW is hired by, fired by and answers to the commission.

The scuttlebutt is that the House Natural Resources Committee will either kill the bill, or amend it in an attempt to retain the Commission’s current regulatory authority over the WDFW; but this would keep everything else in the bill, including changing the position of Director of the WDFW into a cabinet appointment (by the Governor) rather than an appointment controlled by the Fish & Wildlife Commission. It was the current Governor who stripped the commission of four members, and replaced them with four of her own choosing, thereby igniting a scuffle that started a downward spiral that the commission has suffered from ever since. Would it be a good idea for a Governor, any Governor, to be given authority to appoint some friend as the Director of WDFW? In my opinion, no, it wouldn’t.

It is speculated that, if this bill dies in the House Natural Resources Committee, the Senate is prepared to then call each current commissioner up for confirmation as it should have done long ago (but, for some political reasons unbeknownst to me, hasn’t). George Orr is the only seated commissioner who has been confirmed. The only one! I think this is more evidence of political ballyhoo. I hope that SB 5127 does die in the committee so that the Governor will be obligated to compel the Senate to move forward with the confirmation processes; the current commissioners who are unworthy will be canned and others will be appointed to take their places. That is how it was designed to work and when allowed to work, it works well. It is further conjectured that the Senate likely will not confirm anyone except Chuck Perry. From the little bit I’ve spoken to Mr. Perry I think he is a good man and an asset to the hunting community.

A couple of days ago I was sent a link to a video recording of a February 2, 2009 Senate Natural Resources Committee hearing in which Mr. Ed Owens, representing both the Coalition of Coastal Fisheries and the Hunters Heritage Council, spoke in support of the bill. This confuses me because as a longtime supporter of Mr. Owens and the HHC I don't understand why 'my' lobbyist would support a bill that would take the public input process away from hunters. That is… unless he knows full well that it won't make it out of the House committee. I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt and presume that this is the case.

Mr. Owens was among the people who helped write Referendum 45. It was Referendum 45 that gave us equity of harvest. For the past fourteen years the commission has protected us from the department. Archery hunters have been satisfied with the allocation formula used to allocate the bull tags on the east side; the commission gave us that against the department’s requests. The commission has been very fair to hunters over the years. Many times the department recommended that archery seasons be shortened and many times the commission listened to reasonable arguments against the department’s proposals and voted in favor of maintaining our season lengths. If the process that we have now is abolished archery hunting will suffer.

Commercial fishing interests are supporting the bill. Nothing against them, but I don’t believe they have hunters' best interests at heart on this one. And I don’t think it is right to rub out the only safeguard hunters have just to appease the commercial fishing industry. So, I believe we are courting disaster if we don’t fight against this attempt to change the current commission structure.

We have approximately one week to make it known to our Representatives in the House how we feel about significance of Referendum 45. To do so go to: http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature then click the "Find your District" tab; fill in your address and it will give you the links and addresses of your Representatives. The most important contacts right now are the eight members of the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee: Chairman Brian Blake, Vice-Chairman Jim Jacks, Bruce Chandler, Norma Smith, Laura Grant-Herriot, Joel Kretz, Marko Liias and John McCoy. Everyone in the state can write to a Committeeperson, but if any of them are from your district tell them so, and then your letter will be of particularly strong influence!

Please take the time to send them a letter (or at least an email; but a letter carries more weight) expressing what it means to you as a hunter to have a Fish & Wildlife Commission with the authority to regulate the actions of the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife. The importance of this should be especially obvious now, in light of the tremendous turnout by the archery hunters at the commission meeting two weeks ago; of the approximately one hundred people who attended on Saturday it is estimated that as many as three-quarters of them were archery hunters. Significant gains were made at that meeting. It was Referendum 45 that made the public’s involvement possible. This public process will be lost if SB 5127 becomes law.

For Archery Hunting,
Dale Sharp

PS. You can read the Commission’s Position Statement on SB5127 by clicking this link or by cutting and pasting it into your browser’s address line: http://www.wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2009/03/mar1309_5127sb_fwc_position.pdf
They explained it better than I can.
[/align]

summit daWg

From:
Bailey, Cameron ([email protected]) on behalf of Pearson, Rep. Kirk ([email protected])




Sent:
Mon 3/23/09 11:44 AM

To:





.ExternalClass .EC_EmailQuote
{margin-left:1pt;padding-left:4pt;border-left:#800000 2px solid;}



Mr. Zielasko,[/align][/align]Rep. Pearson asked me to let you know that he received your email regarding SB 5127 this morning. He also asked me to tell you that he shares your very serious concerns with the bill as it is currently drafted.[/align][/align]I understand that it is being heard in his committee on March 24th at 8:00am. That would I think be a good place to try and stop or seriously amend the bill.[/align][/align]Sincerely,[/align]Cameron Bailey[/align]Senior L.A. to Rep. Kirk Pearson[/align][/align][/align][/align]Recived this today[/align][/align][/align][/align][/align]

summit daWg

Looks like WE won for now......Pasted from Huntingwa.com







Member
Offline

Posts: 19





[/align]

[/align]« on: Yesterday at 03:50:18 PM

[/align]


[hr]



steelspanker



Reged: 09/21/05
Posts: 36
Loc: Snohomish Co.
5127 language stripped and 1778 passed
#374124 - 04/15/09 08:55 AM

In case you have not heard, SHB 1778 passed out of the Senate yesterday without the Jacobsen 5127 language. Yea! (It was stripped out after Senator Zarelli challenged the amendment on the grounds it went beyond the scope of the title.

With 1778, sporties will pay a 10% surcharge on licenses for the next two years but overall, this is great news.

Thanks to all who wrote and spoke up against the 5127 B.S.



[/align]

summit daWg

Here we are coming up on 2011 and queen Gagwhore herself has proposed the same BS this year. Wouldn't it be just wonderfull to have more libtards ruining our wildlife dept appointed by the likes of IT?? Abolish the game commission?


http://hunting-washington.com/smf/in...c,64084.0.html



http://hunting-washington.com/smf/in...c,64070.0.html

hunt genious

SO why hasn't the CCA jumped all over this ? or have they? i havn't seen anything in the media about the CCA doing squat to protect our rights.

Im just courious

I used to be a CCA member

summit daWg

Heard nothing yet either, but when the legislature goes into session (NO-ONES wallet or rights is safe from these people) I believe that will change.