Written by Melannie Jones, Executive Director INWC
The future of Washington’s hunting and fishing heritage is at a critical juncture—not because of a single regulation, but due to deepening concerns about transparency and accountability within the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Commission.
Over the past several months, public records, court filings, and commission meeting transcripts have shed light on internal communications that many believe signal a troubling lack of transparency. At the center of it all is a growing unease—shared by hunters, anglers, tribal leaders, and conservationists alike—that some decision-making may be happening out of public view, in ways that undermine trust and integrity.
Where It All Began
In 2023, Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (SAF) filed a request under Washington’s Public Records Act (PRA), seeking emails and other documents from several WDFW commissioners. This request was prompted by a separate legal case involving Commissioner Lorna Smith, who was accused of violating state law by holding two public offices simultaneously.
That legal challenge ultimately led to a Washington Supreme Court ruling in October 2024, which determined that Smith had indeed violated state law. She later resigned from her local planning commission role.
But the initial records request—now months overdue—opened a much broader window.
The Lawsuit for Records
By January 2025, more than 500 days had passed since the request, and SAF had received less than 0.01% of the requested materials. The organization filed a lawsuit in Thurston County Superior Court, arguing that WDFW and its commissioners were obstructing access to public records. As SAF Vice President of Government Affairs Dr. Todd Adkins put it:
“The Commission has attempted to hide the ball at every turn… this is corruption on steroids.”
While bold, that quote reflects a growing public concern: that what’s happening behind closed doors may not align with the values of openness, accountability, and lawful governance.
What the Records Revealed
Between May and June 2025, WDFW finally released thousands of documents. SAF and other watchdogs quickly raised alarms.
The records included communications between Commissioners Lorna Smith, Melanie Rowland, John Lehmkuhl, and Tim Ragan, and members of the animal-rights advocacy group Washington Wildlife First. These exchanges appeared to show coordination on wildlife policy decisions—most notably the cancellation of the state’s spring bear hunt—outside of public meetings and official comment periods.
In several instances, commissioners discussed deleting messages or used alternative communication channels in ways that could violate public record laws. One commissioner even acknowledged deleting materials before fully understanding the state’s legal obligations for retention.
This pattern raised serious questions—not just legal ones, but ethical ones. Washington’s Public Records Act is in place to ensure that government decisions are made in the open, with citizens able to examine how policies are shaped and why.
Petition for Removal
On June 27, 2025, SAF submitted a formal petition to Governor Jay Ferguson, requesting the removal of the four commissioners based on the contents of the released records. The petition outlines multiple potential violations of the Public Records Act and points to a possible breach of public trust.
Whether these actions constitute legal wrongdoing will be decided by the courts. SAF has filed a motion for summary judgment, with a hearing scheduled for August 1, 2025, in Thurston County Superior Court. But regardless of outcome, the documents themselves have stirred concern across Washington’s outdoors community—and beyond.
Spring Bear Hunt: A Flashpoint
Nowhere has this controversy felt more real than in the debate over the spring bear hunt. Long regarded by wildlife managers as a critical population management tool, the spring season was canceled despite biological support and public demand.
At a WDFW Commission meeting in late June 2025, citizens—including tribal members, biologists, and sportsmen—expressed outrage. Many pointed to the communications revealed in the SAF records, arguing that anti-hunting ideology may have taken precedence over science and process. Video also captures moments from the June Commission meeting, where Commissioner Lorna Smith openly accused Dr. Adkins of being a “liar,” further eroding civility and trust.
A video interview with Todd Adkins, published by the Vortex Nation Podcast (watch here) outlines these claims, citing specific records that appear to show an orchestrated effort—outside the public’s view—to shape outcomes like the spring bear decision.
A Question of Integrity
Let’s be clear: no court has issued a final judgment. No criminal charges have been filed. But the evidence and behavior documented so far present a troubling picture—one that suggests the possibility of corruption within a process that should be above reproach.
At the Inland Northwest Wildlife Council, we don’t jump to conclusions. We do, however, stand firmly for transparency, accountability, and science-based management. These principles are not optional. They are the foundation of fair, inclusive, and sustainable fish and wildlife policy.
We urge the public and elected officials to take these concerns seriously—not as partisan fodder, but as a test of whether our institutions are serving the people and the natural resources they are sworn to protect.
Where We Go From Here
INWC will continue to monitor the case and advocate for integrity in wildlife governance. We encourage our members and fellow citizens to attend commission meetings, speak up, and stay informed. Whether or not the courts rule in SAF’s favor, the broader question remains:
If decisions affecting Washington’s outdoors are being shaped in private, who are they really for?
The outdoors belong to all of us. So should the decision-making.
To see the evidence that SAF has collected; click here