Regarding the letter “Wolf management: Trust WDFW”:
The recent restraining order pertaining to lethal removal of wolves is an important petition to bring the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife into compliance with the law requiring it to follow a process adhering to best available science, full disclosure, public involvement, alternative actions, etc., as it develops policy.
This process was ignored in the development of plans for lethal removal of listed endangered wolves in our state. Instead, a selectively appointed Wolf Advisory Group comprised of mainly hunters and livestock producers with a few mostly go-along environmentalists was used to rubber-stamp policy devised by WDFW. Within WAG itself, a “sufficient consensus” model is used, which facilitates agreement without dissent. Because of this travesty, the avenue of legal remedy is the only one left to get WDFW to follow the law.
Thanks to the Center For Biological Diversity, there may be a resulting opportunity for the majority of Washingtonians to offer public input on policy as required by law.
Most Read Opinion Stories
- Big Oil and Big Soda save the people from bad ideas | Op-Ed
- Can Seattle grow the next Amazon? Lessons from the HQ2 quest | Editorial
- Even after ‘SNL’ jab, I won’t get sucked into outrage culture | Dan Crenshaw / Guest columnist
- More states should follow Washington and vote by mail | Editorial
- One big loser of the midterms: Russian hackers, thanks to U.S. Cyber Command | Eli Lake / Syndicated columnist
Sharon Stroble, Seattle