I don't object at all to the inclusion of non-game species under the wildlife agency's umbrella. It's appropriate and needed. What's not so clear is the management objective since WDFW's enabling legislation is aimed primarily at managing fish and wildlife for harvest. (Harvest is co-equal to species preservation as written in the legislation.) That's why, with little more than species perpetuation as the legislative guideline, I think the Department did amazingly well with the wolf management plan.

As WA's human population continues to grow, the % of the population that hunts and or fishes decreases. So whose interest(s) is WDFW supposed to be responsive to? Since idiots are allowed to vote, does this mean that uninformed and misinformed opinions should carry the same weight as informed and professional opinions? Yikes, if that's the case.