So she actually said that her focus would remain on making decisions guided by "sound science and the public trust?" I almost hurt myself laughing.

The lack of public trust is directly attributable to her abject failure to accept the science as provided by her professional biologists.

She clearly lives in a self-induced world of denial.

My interaction with the commission was mostly done 10 years ago but I have followed them. What I have trouble understanding is just how and the h--- they got where they are at. This is followed by what an idiot the governor was on resource issues to have appointed these folks. I mean it is liked being forced to watch the movie Dumb and Dumber every day every week. I mean like it is painful !!!!

I think the real decline started first with Boldt and then when we had the initiatives that banned traps, hounds, and so on.

The agency(s) did a really poor job of explaining why things were done. What the constraints were, what biology said, and so on. This was both internal external because I know (as doe Rivrguy) that internally there were staff who imitated 2x4s as well folks on the outside.

This was followed by continuing shift in folks with no actual hands-on contact with the resources and with the users and with the observers.

The Senate bears some of the blame because at times over the last 20-30 years they did not an actually confirm some nominees, they just punted. Couple that with an anti-use governor and it slides downhill.

Things will never go back to the "way they were" because we have many more people, much less accessible land, fewer resources, and escalating costs that folks are unwilling to pay.

But Dumber and Dumber is an apt description.

Latest an AI search got for me.

Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission investigation centers on whether four sitting commissioners violated the Open Public Meetings Act and the Public Records Act ahead of their controversial 2022 decision to ban spring bear hunts.

The Independent Governor's InvestigationIn April 2026, Governor Bob Ferguson received the final, independent report from an outside investigator probing whether commissioners mishandled public records and colluded behind the scenes with animal rights activists. While the governor's office has acknowledged receipt of the final report, the report has not yet been released to the public, and the state has declined to specify a timeline for its publication.

The probe was originally greenlit after Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Director Kelly Susewind forwarded an internal legal memo detailing "serious risks" of conflict of interest and favoritism among specific board members.The "Knoll Memo" Public ReleaseThe basis for the state investigation became public through the release of an internal document known as the Knoll Memo.

Uncovered by a public records request from the Sportsmen's Alliance, the 10-page memo alleges that Commissioners Lorna Smith and Melanie Rowland bypassed standard transparency protocols and appeared to have wildlife advocacy leaders "on speed dial" to shape state hunting policies. The targeted commissioners have fiercely denied these allegations, calling the memo a collection of "unsupported accusatory opinions".Federal Retaliation LawsuitThe internal rift escalated into federal court when Commissioner Lorna Smith and Washington Wildlife First (WW1) filed a civil rights lawsuit against WDFW Director Kelly Susewind and Deputy Director Amy Windrope.

The Allegation: Smith claims that Susewind weaponized the internal memo and the subsequent investigation to intimidate, muzzle, and retaliate against her for opposing his pro-hunting agenda.The Latest Update: On June 22, 2026, Director Susewind struck back by filing a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The defense argues that Smith lacks standing to sue because she remains an active commissioner with full voting power, meaning no tangible harm or silencing has occurred.Public and Commission TensionThe gridlock has caused immense friction during public meetings.

While the Sportsmen's Alliance continues to petition the governor for the outright removal of the embattled commissioners, reform advocates have publicly called for WDFW leadership to be held accountable for allegedly targeting dissenting viewpoints. The Commission has also updated its internal "Rules of Procedure" in an attempt to restore frayed public trust while the governor reviews the investigation's final conclusions.Would you like to explore specific details from the Knoll Memo, review the timeline of the spring bear hunt ban, or look into the legal arguments in the ongoing federal lawsuit?AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses

LATEST UPDATE:


A year and $80K later, a probe of WA fish and wildlife commissioners continues Gov. Bob Ferguson has been mum on when the results of his investigation will be released.

By
Jerry Cornfield
-
July 13, 2026 4:00 am

(Photo courtesy of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)

An investigation of Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission members launched by Gov. Bob Ferguson last summer is taking longer and costing more than expected.

The tab is nearly $80,000 so far and could reach $130,000, more than triple the original price, according to recently obtained public records. Neither Ferguson nor his staff will say when the investigator’s report — originally due last fall — will be released. The latest contract extension runs through the end of August.

“To protect the integrity of the investigation, we will not comment on the specifics of the investigation until it is complete. I will note that it involves the review of a significant volume of records,” Brionna Aho, Ferguson’s communications director, said in an email.

Chiedza Nziramasanga of Transformative Workplace Investigations delivered findings on April 13. Those have been under review by the governor’s staff. As part of the process, the investigator recently contacted the Department of Fish and Wildlife’s deputy director with questions to clarify information.

Ferguson’s office anticipated the report’s release in April. It has pushed out the date several times and now, per a public record request, says it will be July 31, one month before Nziramasanga’s latest contract expires.

From its start, the governor has made no public statements on the investigation.

Commissioners interviewed for the probe last fall have said they’ve had no contact with the investigator since, and have not heard from Ferguson or his staff in 2026.

“We don’t have any control of what the governor is doing and not doing,” said Jim Anderson, chair of the nine-member Fish and Wildlife Commission. “I am trying to keep us going with our work and stay focused. I feel like the commission is doing that, albeit with this elephant in the room.”

Ferguson can remove any commissioner he thinks is guilty of misconduct, or malfeasance in office, or is incompetent. The process, established by the state’s founders in 1893, requires the governor to file a statement of reasons with the Office of the Secretary of State.

The first-term Democratic governor, who is the state’s former attorney general, might use findings of the report to support such an action.

The big picture
While the investigation’s status and scope are hazy, its genesis looks traceable to the commission’s controversial 2022 decision to ban recreational hunting of black bears in the spring.

The Sportsmen’s Alliance, a national advocacy group for hunters and anglers, argued that commissioners violated state requirements for open meetings and public records disclosure ahead of the vote.

After obtaining a trove of public records, the group, in May 2025, petitioned Ferguson to remove commissioners Lorna Smith, Melanie Rowland, Barbara Baker, and John Lehmkuhl, alleging misconduct and malfeasance. Ferguson has not commented or acted on the petition.

When Kelly Susewind, the leader of Washington’s Department of Fish and Wildlife, read some of the commissioners’ emails and texts provided to the group, he flagged potential issues to the governor’s office. In early August, he formally asked Ferguson to investigate. This was an extraordinary request for an inquiry into the nine-member commission, which oversees his department and has the power to remove a director should it choose.

Unbeknownst to Susewind, Ferguson had already prepared for an investigation.

On June 20, 2025, the Office of Financial Management signed a $40,000 contract with Transformative Workplace Investigations. The firm, per the scope of work, was to “provide a comprehensive investigation of a reported experience in a work unit to allow leadership to determine if any discrimination, retaliation and/or other policy violations occurred as alleged.”

“Our office was aware of a possible need to investigate, based on a preliminary conversation with the (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife),” Aho said last December. “After the governor received the letter from Director Susewind laying out his concerns, it was clear an investigation was needed. At that point the state began to engage with the investigator on initiating the actual investigation.”

Nziramasanga got started in August but did not meet the initial deadline of Oct. 7, 2025.

There have been several contract extensions. The most recent, signed June 12, ends Aug. 31. Nziramasanga had been paid $79,720 as of early May and could earn another $51,500 through the end of her current deal. Those funds will come out of the agency budget.

‘Puzzling’ and ‘complicated’
Susewind and commissioners targeted in the petition were interviewed last year. None have been re-interviewed, though the investigator did seek out Deputy Director Amy Windrope in recent weeks, an agency spokesperson said.

No one from the Sportsmen’s Alliance has ever spoken with the investigator.

“We find it puzzling that the state and investigators have not wanted to have any dialogue with the chief whistleblower on this issue,” said Brian Lynn, vice president marketing and communications for the alliance.

“There is no real justification for a report of this size to take more than a year to complete, and multiple rounds and months of ‘clarifications’ and edits are very concerning,” he said. “Instead of being a champion of transparency and holding rogue bureaucrats accountable, Gov. Ferguson seems content to let their terms expire as a matter of political convenience.”

The appointments for Smith, Rowland and Lemkuhl run through Dec. 31. Baker can serve through the end of 2028.

No one from Washington Wildlife First, which provides a counterpoint to the hunting group and has publicly called for Susewind’s removal, was interviewed either.

Claire Davis, who leads the wildlife advocacy nonprofit, and Smith have filed a federal lawsuit against Susewind, accusing him of attempting to silence them for criticism of his leadership and the agency.

“In a way we’re not surprised by the continued delay,” said Francisco Santiago-Avila, Washington Wildlife First’s advocacy director. “We expect the investigator encountered a more complicated and troubling situation than presented by the director.”

“We hope, given Gov. Bob Ferguson’s background, there is a desire to get this right,” he said. “We’d rather this be a thorough and accurate review rather than a rushed one.”

Here's my guess, distilled from years with WDFW and the state. The Governor, who as AG was not all that thrilled with transparency, will allow the Commissioners in question to leave at the end of their terms. He might try to get the one with a couple years left to resign, but I wouldn't bet that way.

He'll probably hope the Federal Court case, however it goes or even if it goes, will be sufficient legal review to spare him having to directly act.

WA Fish and Wildlife Commission should serve public, accountability
Ryan Garrett
Special to The Seattle Times

Last year, I wrote about multiple issues where the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission failed to live up to its mandate. While some might argue that dissolving the commission in favor of a single cabinet position would create better accountability, that isn’t accurate (“WA Fish and Wildlife Commission has its problems, but we should keep it,” Jan. 21, 2025).

With a cabinet position, the accountability piece wouldn’t change, as the governor would still oversee appointments and removals to the position. Right now, Gov. Bob Ferguson needs to decide if a commissioner’s actions rise to the level of removal, and if so, exercise that power. If he removes members, he also needs to do a better job than his predecessor did, by appointing people who are not beholden to special interests and who respect the state’s public meetings law and accountability.

Right now, Commissioner Lorna Smith, along with several other commissioners, is under investigation for alleged violations of the Open Public Meetings Act and the Public Records Act. One of the allegations is that Smith and others deliberately destroyed emails that belonged to the state, which is a felony.

The investigation into the records law violations began in 2025, when allegations were brought to the attention of the attorney general. In the wake of a damning memo from that investigation, Smith has decided to sue the state, alleging violation of her First Amendment rights. Co-plaintiffs on the suit are Claire Loebes Davis and Washington Wildlife First. Both are frequent petitioners to the commission, and to my knowledge Smith has never voted against their interests, despite the contrary recommendations of staff biologists.
With this lawsuit, Smith has already demonstrated a clear conflict of interest that may put her in violation of RCW 42.52.020. Furthermore, the question of who paid for that lawsuit needs to be publicly answered. Receiving financial consideration, even in the form of legal services, is an unacceptable conflict if it comes from groups whose petitions you vote on.

Who is being sued is also telling: While the report of findings is by Thomas Knoll Jr., a state legal liaison who asked Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife Director Kelly Susewind to aid in the investigation, Smith, et al, have chosen to sue Susewind and Deputy Director Amy Windrope. Imagine being asked to comply with a criminal investigation of your boss and then getting sued by your boss for doing so. That’s what’s happening here. To quote Knoll, Smith’s actions “present serious risks to WDFW in terms of failure to fully abide by the Commission’s Rules of Procedure.”

The mandate of WDFW and the commission is to “preserve, protect, and perpetuate wildlife, fish, and wildlife and fish habitat,” while “maximizing fishing, hunting, and outdoor recreational opportunities compatible with healthy and diverse fish and wildlife populations.” These are not dueling objectives — they are part of a holistic approach to wildlife management

Seen through an observation window, sockeye salmon were scooped up by a net at the Ballard Locks fish ladder in Seattle on July 8, 2025. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife along with the Muckleshoot Tribe collected sockeye during the late peak run for transport to the Cedar River Hatchery. KEN LAMBERT / THE SEATTLE TIMES, 2025 that recognizes that humans are a part of the environment. When we think about nature and civilization separately, we give ourselves the excuse to ignore civilization’s impact on nature.

This sort of balanced approach can’t take place when we have commissioners who are willing to violate laws to push their own agenda. That’s not a matter of disagreeing with Smith’s viewpoint (though I do). It’s a matter of maintaining basic standards of governance to keep the public informed of what our representatives do, and limiting their power to within the constraints of the laws that we have passed. If Gov. Ferguson takes no action here, he demonstrates that these standards do not apply to people who have the money and influence to lawyer up. Smith needs to be removed.

Removing the bad apples from the commission is only part of the solution. Ultimately, the power to remove commissioners may need to be handed over to our Legislature, eliminating the circular accountability structure we have now. An outside check might have prevented this whole thing years ago. In the meantime, I suggest that Gov. Ferguson heed the advice of RCW 77.04.040 and seek out appointment recommendations from “groups representing sportfishers, commercial fishers, hunters, private landowners, and environmentalists.” Not just hunters, not just groups like WWF, but everyone.

That is how he can show that his appointments represent the people of the state.

Ryan Garrett: is a hunting rights activist in Northeast Washington state. He is a registered mentor for First Hunt Foundation and the host of the Hunter Farmer Artisan podcast.

Managing WA's fish and wildlife, in today's world, is a very complex operation. It requires, at all levels from staff to commissioners, people who can put their personal views and preferences to the side and do what is best for the various resources. We need all sides at the table. We need creative thinkers. We also need a Governor, Senate who confirms Commissioners, and a Legislature that funds WDFW to all step up and do their jobs to ensure the mandate is met. They're all failing.