Predators, Politics, and Public Records
The Ugly Truth About Washington’s Wildlife Commission
Washington State’s Fish and Wildlife Commission is supposed to protect the balance of nature through science-based conservation. Instead, it has become a staging ground for ideological warfare against hunters, ranchers, and common-sense wildlife management.
Four commissioners—Barbara Baker, Lorna Smith, Melanie Rowland, and John Lehmkuhl—now stand accused not just of pushing extreme anti-hunting policies, but of violating state transparency laws in the process. Their actions are not only undermining the North American model of conservation— they may be illegal.
It’s no wonder the public’s trust in this commission is evaporating.
Appointed Power, Zero Accountability
Washington’s Fish and Wildlife Commission is made up of nine unelected members, all appointed by the governor to six-year terms. This structure is meant to ensure diverse representation from across the state and from a variety of stakeholders—tribes, sportsmen, conservationists, and the public.
But that balance has collapsed. Under Governor Jay Inslee and now Governor Bob Ferguson, the commission has been packed with environmental activists openly hostile to the hunting and ranching communities that fund and support real conservation. Instead of science, we get secrecy. Instead of representing all Washingtonians, they serve a narrow political base.
Email Daisy Chain?
The Sportsmen’s Alliance, a national advocacy group that defends hunting and fishing rights, uncovered a troubling pattern: Possible illegal coordination among four commissioners aimed at banning the spring bear hunt and advancing a preservationist agenda while actively avoiding the public transparency required by law.
In their July 1 report, the Alliance released findings from a lawsuit which forced the disclosure of internal records that these commissioners initially withheld or deleted in violation of Washington’s Public Records Act. These records show commissioners developing policy in private, outside of public meetings, with a clear intent to avoid scrutiny.
This isn’t just unethical—it’s a betrayal of the public trust. These four commissioners weren’t just advancing personal ideology. They were hiding it from the very citizens they’re supposed to serve. On May 16, the Sportsmen’s Alliance formally petitioned Governor Ferguson to remove them, citing clear and documented misconduct. If this behavior isn’t grounds for dismissal, what is?
The Spring Bear Ban and the Inslee Agenda
This controversy isn’t about bureaucratic process—it’s about real-world damage. In November 2022, the commissioners voted to permanently eliminate the spring bear hunt, calling it a procedural update. Instead of listening to state biologists and decades of data, the commission adopted a preservationist mindset that sees all hunting as morally wrong.
But make no mistake—this was the first major act of what insiders now call the “Inslee era” of fish and wildlife policy: top-down, anti-hunting, and dismissive of rural Washingtonians and tribal hunting culture.
Predators Protected, Prey and Property Ignored
The ripple effects are already being felt. Cougar, bear, and wolf populations are growing past sustainable levels. Ranchers across eastern Washington report escalating livestock losses, while deer and elk herds suffer from unchecked predation.
Former Rep. Joel Kretz, a rancher in Okanogan County, has lost at least eight foals so far this spring to cougar attacks (bit.ly/4eR81Cv). These animals aren’t just livestock—they represent generations of hard work and heritage under siege. Both his livelihood and the important bloodlines he’s working to preserve are under attack. The WDFW might be out to “help” in a few days.
Instead of managing predators in line with ecological balance, the commission has chosen a narrow and reckless path: protect predators at all costs.
Even with data showing cougars are “doing exceedingly well,” the commission is pushing rigid harvest caps by management unit and even counts animals euthanized after attacking livestock against those caps (bit.ly/4nH0UjX). These caps aren’t just unnecessary—they may be illegal.
Hunting Is Conservation
But here’s the truth they won’t say out loud—regulated hunting is conservation.
For more than a century, sportsmen and women have done more for wildlife than any environmental lobbying group. In the early 1900s, whitetail deer and turkeys were nearly gone. It wasn’t activists who brought them back—it was hunters. Through license fees, habitat funding, and science-based wildlife management, hunting has been the most reliable tool for protecting and restoring animal populations in the U.S.
This isn’t some theoretical debate. It’s about science and results. Modern predator management relies on harvest limits, population modeling, and boots-on-the-ground knowledge. When populations exceed thresholds, regulated hunting helps keep things in check. Take that tool away, and nature doesn’t rebalance—it collapses.
The commission’s policies are not just misguided—they’re biologically irresponsible.
More Records, More Evidence
And the story doesn’t stop here. On June 3, the Sportsmen’s Alliance filed additional records requests seeking communications between the Inslee administration and WDFW officials. They want to know how far this goes—whether Olympia’s top brass coordinated these predator policies behind closed doors.
This may not be a few rogue commissioners. It could be an orchestrated campaign from the top down.
The Choice: Remove or Reform
The Sportsman’s Alliance and Washington’s sportsmen, ranchers, and rural families are done waiting. The laws around transparency exist for a reason. When unelected officials push radical policy behind closed doors, they violate not just the law—but the people’s trust. It’s time for consequences.
Governor Ferguson now has a choice: defend the status quo or remove the commissioners who have turned Washington’s wildlife policies into a political circus. These four commissioners need to be replaced. If the governor won’t act, the public must work with legislators to develop changes to reform how commissioners are appointed, and ensure these positions are filled by people who respect science, transparency, and the people they serve.
Government of the People—or the Predators?
This fight isn’t just about bears or cougars or public records. It’s about who government belongs to.
Does it belong to the people—or to the predators hiding in the tall grass and in the board rooms?
Nancy Churchill is a writer and educator in rural eastern Washington State, and the chair of the Ferry County Republican Party. She may be reached at DangerousRhetoric@pm.me. The opinions expressed in Dangerous Rhetoric are her own. Dangerous Rhetoric is available on Substack, X, and occasionally Rumble.
SOURCES:
1) SAF Petitions Washington Governor for Removal of Commissioners Sportsmen’s Alliance, May 16, 2025, https://bit.ly/4eLBMER
2) Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission, https://bit.ly/452ag2s
3) Evidence Against Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission Sportsmen’s Alliance, July 1, 2025 , https://bit.ly/4eMa9vb
4) An Open Letter to Washington Fish and Wildlife Commissioners Sportsmen’s Alliance, July 9, 2025 , https://bit.ly/3U824ay
5) Colt Got Hit Hard, Claw Marks on Both Sides and Teeth Marks in the Throat, Joel Kretz Promised Land Ranch, July 12, 2025, https://bit.ly/4eR81Cv
6) Hunting Equals Conservation, Sportsmen's Alliance on Facebook, July 11, 2025, https://bit.ly/3TExYvo
7) Sportsmen’s Alliance Submits Additional Record Requests to WDFW, Sportsmen's Alliance, June 3, 2025, https://bit.ly/4eNyxfR
8) Bear, Cougar Regs by Washington’s Game Commission Unnecessary, Likely Illegal, Sportsmen's Alliance, https://bit.ly/4nH0UjX
Nancy,
Great article! This article reminded me that HB 1930 during this past legislative session addressed this very issue. Our FPIW bill summary on 1930:
A December report from the William D. Ruckelshaus Center found that many people who interact with the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission consider its current structure “dysfunctional” and in need of reforms, citing concerns about effectiveness, transparency and accountability. Just two days before Bob Ferguson took over the Governor’s office, former Gov. Jay Inslee appointed Lynn O’Connor and reappointed commission vice chair Tim Ragen to the nine-member group, which oversees the Department of Fish and Wildlife and plays a key part in setting wildlife management policy. A week later, Ferguson sent a letter to the state Senate asking for the nomination process to be halted. He cited “multiple letters, emails and other correspondence from individuals, tribes and other entities expressing a desire for a more extensive process for these appointments.” The Senate unanimously agreed to withdraw the appointments, leaving the commission down two members. It’s just the latest twist in a growing debacle surrounding the commission and its role. The findings have sparked legislation this session to change the appointment process.
Currently, the governor appoints all nine of the commission’s members. They are subject to confirmation by the state Senate and serve six-year terms. According to state law, the governor must strive for a balance when selecting members that reflects the different aspects of fish and wildlife management, such as fishing, hunting and conservation. A bill recently introduced in the Legislature is attempting to change the process.
House Bill 1930 reforms the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission by changing its composition and appointment process. Instead of being entirely appointed by the governor, the nine-member commission will now have six members selected by counties within six departmental regions, with each region nominating one representative through a collaborative county process. The remaining three members will be at-large appointments made by the governor, with the requirement that at least one at-large member must reside in eastern Washington and another in western Washington. To be eligible for appointment, commissioners must have held a hunting or fishing license in three of the five years preceding their appointment. The bill also introduces provisions for staggered initial terms, with the first regional appointments to be made by December 31, 2025, and beginning January 1, 2026. Additionally, the bill encourages the department to invite commissioners to participate in training on tribal sovereignty and rights, and mandates that the commission hold in-person meetings in each of its six regions to improve communication and address potential conflicts, subject to appropriate funding.
Sadly, this bill never made it out of committee. I will encourage Representative's Dent and Orcutt to run this bill again in 2026. Let's continue to 'spread the news' on this issue. Thank you for your excellent review. I would like to share it across our platforms.