Jerry Lowdermilk: Activist commissions sow dysfunction on Fish and Wildlife Commission

By Jerry Lowdermilk

In 2023, the William D. Ruckelshaus Center was directed by the state Legislature to perform an organizational review of the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission.

The review was nonpartisan, impartial and independent and took over a year to complete. It was spurred on by prominent anti-hunting interests in the state hoping that the center’s final recommendation would be to dismantle the current commission structure and make it more vulnerable to political influences.

Ultimately, the final 66-page report identified numerous examples of dysfunction and ineffectiveness, but it did not definitively recommend a complete overhaul of the commission, but rather offered three options: maintain status quo , make WDFW a cabinet agency or maintain the commission with targeted reform.

As thorough as the review was, what it didn’t capture is that the dysfunction is solely due to five commissioners that are in bed with radical environmentalists and animal rights advocates.

Over the past five years they have shown over and over again that they will stop at nothing, potentially including breaking the law, to move their agenda forward. Four of the five are under investigation by the governor’s office for potential ethical and procedural violations, including allegedly deleting public records and colluding to fix votes prior to commission meetings. In addition, they have abandoned using science or the department biologists and staff to guide their decision making.

They eliminated the spring bear season in direct contradiction to the recommendations of the department biologists to continue the hunt. They voted not to down list wolves when the biologists recommended it and clearly demonstrated that wolves were exceeding population demographic goals. They voted to severely restrict cougar hunting when department staff recommended no changes to the current hunt structure due to strong population indicators. They have continued to fight to eliminate fall bear hunting in August, which again, does not align with department recommendations. And finally, they have wasted 3½ years trying to implement a new conservation policy with clear anti-hunting verbiage despite overwhelming opposition by tribes and the general public.

When individuals prioritize their personal values and agenda over science and the public’s desires it leads to dysfunction. There is no longer objectivity or selflessness in decision making. Transparency and trust are lost and replaced with marginalizing the values of communities that don’t align with theirs. This dysfunction, along with a mountain of evidence corroborating the alleged violations, has culminated in the governor’s investigation, but now the commissioners in question are crying foul and actively working to defend their actions and refute the results of the Ruckelshaus report.

“Dysfunctional” has been the label that has been given to the commission since the Ruckelshaus report was published. This label has left an extremely bitter taste in the mouth of the commissioners under investigation because it has put their inappropriate and unprofessional behavior square in the cross hairs, but it has also highlighted their incompetence, despite their apparent willingness to break the law, in their attempt to eliminate hunting in this state.

They are failing on all fronts, due in large part, to the credit and perseverance of the commissioners that have not been willing to bow to special interest groups and the ever increasing engagement by the hunting and angling communities. So, while they passionately work to persuade the public that the commission isn’t dysfunctional, I can actually agree with part of that sentiment. The commission as a whole is not dysfunctional, that label applies strictly to the commissioners under investigation.

Jerry Lowdermilk, of Orting, Washington, is a lifelong hunter angler and conservation advocate.