<< Back to all DEIS Comments


Public Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
Online Comments on DEIS: Wolf Conservation and Management Plan for Washington

<< Back to DEIS Online Comments list

Comments on Land Use (Section 4.2.2):

NO WOLFS

Jim Steveson,  Vader WA

We have a state grazing lease (school section). Will leases be rebid much lower when extra predator losses occur without witnesses, and thus not complete compensation? This could have some negative effect on the state general fund. Contrary to some government spending, we cannot spend more than we make (on grazing).

John P Nordheim,  Waitsburg WA

As long as wolves are listed endangered or threatened,no industry should be allowed to continue on public lands where wolves are attempting to recover. The presence of commercial industry in these areas where wolves are living will only disrupt conservation efforts and is unfair to the wolf population.

JULIAN RUSSELL,  BRISTOW VA

THe use of public lands by other interests may be affected but all types of land uses must adapt to other uses and the viablity of wolves on public lands is now one use of the land as determined by the public.

Ray DePuydt,  Kettle Falls WA

Please do not restrict the notion of the wolf being a generalist as a reason to avoid this difficult area. Human behavior should be moderated so as to give respectful reign to the needs not just of the wolf, but of its prey as well, which, incidentally, may not be so general.

Sean V Owen,  Seattle WA

I would hope that wolf habitat does not become a big reason for WDFW to buy more private land.

Anonymous

Encourage private ownerships to provide habitat for wolves. Are State tax incentives ba possibility?

Anonymous

Manipulated information that is misleading, a sales pitch for wolves.

dale denney,  colville WA

We've spent years building up herds of elk,deer,& other game Where do you planning on putting them with out destroying these, Ask Id, & Mt.

Gerald W Guhlke,  Reardan WA

My family uses the land to make a living and wolves will only be detrimental to producing livestock, no good can come from them being here.

AnonymousClarkston WA

Livestock are allowed to graze on government land for pennies per acre. Losses due to wolves probably account for <1% yearly. The good that wolves do for the ecosystem far outweighs the bad that many people think.

Anonymous

I would see mauch more land used for the apex predators

Diane Sonntag,  Tenino WA

I believe the big push for higher numbers, is just one of many ways the enviromental community to make it to difficult to use land for livestock grazing.

Jess Kayser,  Centerville WA

I do not think ranchers using public land should be compensated for loss to wolves.

Stephanie George,  Newport WA

hanchers have a hard enough time raising sheep and cattle with out haveing to worry about wolves

gary Ryan,  sekiu WA

reintroduction is a poor at best idea.

FRED S Chapman, Jr,  RAYMOND WA

Land use patterns and design must fit within the greater context of nature's economy. If we must adjust so that wolves and people can both thrive in the reigon, then so be it.

David Moen,  Oregon City OR

private land owners will suffer

bruce oergel,  ellensburg WA

NO WOLVES

Anonymous

Send them back to ID. or Canada before our,and your trouble begins. Idaho & Wyoming are loosing other animials ,deer, elk, and doemestic animals

Tom Freeman,  Tonasket WA

Land use needs to be managed so that it is congruent with all of the states citizens. Not just those who happen to participate in concerned industries.

Ryan Alexander Sparks,  Pullman WA

kill every damn wolf in washington idaho and montana. its devastating the elk and deer populations already in tremendous amounts. hunters keep the populations of elk and deer at a good rate anyhow theres no need in destroy all of the deer and elk. soon there wont be any. i hate this state and its government. i hate washington state

Anonymous

THere will not be any land closures due to any wolf siteings.

Jim Rubert,  Puyallup WA

Land use by people will decrease, making outdoor activities more risky.

Jay Arment,  Spokane WA

Are you talking to the folks who are now working on the Okanogan comprehensive zoning plan? How will any changes proposed by that plan affect your wolf plan?

Marcia avajas,  Bainbridge Island WA

I don't think we have the available land to support 15 breeding pairs in this state

Warren D Gimlin,  East Wenatchee WA

When the populations of deer & elk becomes grossly dismal, will we be able to hunt/control wolves or will the courts and special interest groups keep it wrapped up in the courts for ever and a day? More than likely the state would close the GMU's or greatly reduce the hunting in those GMU's that wolves inhabit have been hunted for generations?

Jeff Butterworth,  Maple Valley WA

The plan must balance the challenges faced by livestock owners in wolf country as this challenge continue to be one of the most significant barriers to widespread acceptance of our wolf restoration goals.Work must continue with Ranchers to help them better understand and implement ways to reduce livestock conflicts with wolves.

elizabeth archambault,  Seattle WA

None

Lois Neuman,  Vancouver WA

As a member online of the League of Women Voters and also having a sister who is a chairperson of the League of Women Voters in Virginia who works parttime for a Senator who support the conservation of God's breathing creations, not for man's purpose, but for His.

MB ,   FL

We already have to many land use restrictions. Don't add more.

Teresa Selby,  Bonney Lake WA

It's time to share the land, not eradicate every unwanted species from existance.

Anonymous

Good uses of habitat.

Micheal Pacholski,  Toledo OH

Land use is already choked to nothing in this state so let's introduce wolves and reduce even more land use good idea

Anonymous

Public land should not be closed to use EVER because of wolves.

Darcy Mitchem,  Toutle Wa WA

Leave our lands wild. Who needs wolves?

Larry Zalaznik,  Walla Walla WA