Events Of The New Chair’s First Day In Charge Of The Fish And Wildlife Commission

What a day in Bellingham for the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission and WDFW!

New chair and vice chair.

Calls for the director’s removal.

Case against them dismissed in superior court.

Case appealed upstairs.

I’ve already reported on Jim Anderson and John Lehmkuhl taking on new leadership roles with the citizen panel that oversees WDFW policy and which hires and fires its director, but this morning Washington Wildlife First and their allies also came a’calling for Director Kelly Susewind’s head.

They were incensed by a letter Susewind sent Governor Bob Ferguson on August 5 in which the director asked the Governor’s Office to “initiate an investigation of members” of the commission following release of public records that “call the conduct of several commissioners into question,” documents that led him “to believe further investigation is warranted.”

The commissioners in question are Lehmkuhl, Barbara Baker, Lorna Smith and Melanie Rowland, who are accused by the Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation of “collusion and malfeasance,” not to mention “felonies?!?”

“I know this is a big ask,” Susewind wrote to Ferguson. “Your review and appropriate action would demonstrate the standard of accountability necessary to allow WDFW to maintain a level of service that the public expects and deserves.”

The Governor’s Office subsequently “directed Washington State Human Resources to conduct an investigation,” according to a statement.

The “leaked” letter was revealed in a Columbia Insight story posted yesterday, and WWF members and friends used the article and letter to claim Susewind was in lockstep with SAF, overtly “working with a trophy hunting group to eliminate all the commissioners who challenge his iron grip on Washington’s wildlife policy,” and stated that he should be removed.

They might have had a better shot at removal if their 11th-hour appointments from Governor Jay Inslee had not been pulled by Ferguson early this year and replaced, but the likelihood of the current commission firing Susewind are low, at least at present.

For his part, the director shot a couple magazines’ worth of holes in WWF’s theory that he was gung-ho to bring back bruin permit hunts in April, May and June.

“Since our last meeting, I have denied 10 petitions related to spring bear hunting,” Susewind reported to the commission during his director’s segment this morning.

He added that there were three more petitions in the hopper. If he follows through on those the same way as every other one that’s come his way, they’ll be denied as well.

The director has not varied from the commission’s controversial decisions to not hunt bears in spring.

Damned bunny hugger anyway.

Meanwhile, late in the day, as WWF made more public their case against Susewind, a sportsmen’s group made strong allegations about a source of funding for its executive director’s law practice – billionaire philanthropist Jody Allen’s Wild Lives Foundation.

AS FOR THAT DISMISSED CASE, that occurred in Thurston County this afternoon after SAF asked Judge John Skinder for summary judgment in its Public Records Act case against WDFW over how long it took the agency to fulfill its request for documents related to the commission’s scrubbing of the spring bear hunt several years ago.

The organization said WDFW took 600-plus days to finish the job, and they got less than 13 percent of the 470,000-plus documents initially believed to be related to the request.

SAF sued in January and this July filed for summary judgment, which they explained “essentially asks the judge to rule on the case because the evidence brought forth to this point shows obvious and blatant disregard of the Public Records Act and further proceedings on the merits of the case is unnecessary.”

Following arguments and deliberations early this afternoon, Judge Skinder called it a “complex public records case” and termed the amount of initially responsive records that were found to be “not overly broad.”

He also said the government was “allowed to give records out in installments” and that WDFW was “expending a large amount of resources to comply” with the request.

“The complaint will be dismissed with prejudice,” Skinder ruled.

Very shortly afterwards and about 150 miles and 14 hours north on I-5, WDFW attorney Joe Panensko appeared before the commission to report on the developments and get ahead of the headlines.

“The case is closed, subject to appeal. All that means is that the department was found to be sufficient to the Public Records Act,” said Panesko, who also called it a “great victory.”

SAF did not appear to share the same feelings and immediately announced it will appeal the judge’s ruling to the Washington State Court of Appeals.

“The decision is surprising – even for Washington. But we look forward to appealing this decision, and we will be happy to visit the Washington Supreme Court again, if needed,” Todd Adkins, senior vice president, said in a press release. “This case is far from over.”

The state’s highest court is where SAF enjoyed a victory against Governor Inslee when justices upheld a lower court ruling that a Fish and Wildlife Commission member couldn’t hold another appointive position at the same time, which Commissioner Lorna Smith did when she was put on the panel by the former governor.

SAF legal counsel Michael Jean said in this latest case Judge Skinder “was distracted by the state’s persistent attempts to downplay and distort the mishandling of our PRA request.”

Late in the day, WDFW posted a statement about the judge’s ruling: “Today the Thurston County Superior court ruled in Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s favor on public records litigation brought by the Sportsmen’s Alliance. The court found that the Department provided reasonable estimates of time and had not improperly withheld the requested public records pertaining to the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission. We’re pleased with the decision today, upholding our commitment to providing public records in alignment with the state’s public records act (PRA). We appreciate the Thurston County Superior Court’s thorough review, which showed no violations of public records requirements. “

AS FOR THE REST of today’s Fish and Wildlife Commission fun, Anderson has just recessed the body about 15 minutes early this afternoon. They will meet again Saturday morning at 8 a.m.

As he did with his Fish Committee yesterday, Anderson kept today’s meeting humming as the commission heard about Region 4 staffers, projects and issues, completion of the Skagit Wildlife Area Management Plan, discussed parameters of an upcoming retreat, and made decisions on 2026 legislative and supplemental budget requests, the latter of which did not include funding for Lake Washington predator suppression.

Anderson did turn commissioners’ heads at the conclusion of public comment when he did not provide an opportunity for members to defend, rebut, counter, contradict, shoot down, argue about/with, deflect or otherwise discuss what they’d just taken in from passionate folks of all flavors, as had become routine and unnecessarily alienating under former Chair Barbara Baker.

Instead, he summarized by saying they had just heard “some very good testimony – some very pointed.”

“We’ll take the information under advisement and that gives us food for thought,” Anderson added as he landed the commission ahead of schedule for their 10:30 a.m. break.

Breaks and lunches, fishing, hunting and conservation, and moving along drive the new chair.

And that is going to have to be all for this writing exercise.