We Call it Free Speech. They Call it Collusion.

This is your central hub for everything related to our campaign to challenge entrenched power, expose special interest capture, and ensure the voices of the public and wildlife are heard. Here you’ll find key updates, media, and analysis on our effort to hold WDFW leadership accountable and defend the right to speak, organize, and advocate for science-based, ethical wildlife policy, including on our recent federal civil rights lawsuit. Check back regularly for the latest updates as this work continues to unfold.

WW1 v. Susewind: A civil rights case at the heart of Not My WDFW

Washington Wildlife First (WW1), our Executive Director Claire Loebs Davis, and Washington Fish & Wildlife Commissioner Lorna Smith have filed a federal civil rights lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against WDFW Director Kelly Susewind and Deputy Director Amy Windrope. Our complaint brings claims under the First Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for viewpoint discrimination and retaliation—core constitutional protections that prohibit government officials from punishing people for speaking out.

As set out in our complaint, Susewind and Windrope used their authority and public agency resources to target Commissioner Smith, Claire Loebs Davis, and WW1 because they criticized agency leadership, challenged its policies, and advocated for science-based, ethical, and accountable wildlife governance. Susewind and Windrope directed staff to search communications, compile records, and construct baseless, defamatory accusations of “collusion” between commissioners and wildlife advocates based on protected speech and association. Then, they used those accusations to push for investigations and the removal of dissenting commissioners. 

This is exactly the pattern at the center of our Not My WDFW campaign. For years, we have documented how agency leadership elevates a narrow set of consumptive interests while sidelining the values, concerns, and voices of most Washingtonians. This lawsuit shows how far that dynamic has gone: when those broader public values are asserted—through science, advocacy, or oversight—they are treated as a threat to be managed, rather than a mandate to be respected.

ACTION HUB

Join us for the next Commission web-conference on Friday, October 9.

Use our talking points to speak on behalf of wildlife as we push back against WDFW leadership’s efforts to silence public voices. 

 

Days until next commission meeting: 

 
 

Why it matters: Susewind will stop at nothing to uphold narrow, consumptive interests and shut out the public

This lawsuit exposes what happens when a public agency stops treating oversight and broad public engagement as part of its duty. The First Amendment protects the right to challenge government decisions, advocate for change, and work with others to do so. When those in power respond by targeting critics, searching their communications, and building fraudulent cases against them, it sends a clear message: dissent will not be tolerated.

It also reveals a deeper values gap within agency leadership. Advocacy for stronger wildlife protections, accountability, and transparency is treated not as a reflection of public priorities, but as something suspect. That response reflects an entrenched view that wildlife policy should continue to serve a narrow, traditional user group—rather than evolve to reflect broader public values and scientific concerns.

Susewind—and, by extension, Windrope and their team—embodies this deeper problem. His leadership reflects and reinforces an agency that is widely out of step with the public it is meant to serve, and his response to growing scrutiny makes clear that meaningful reform will be impossible under his direction.

Unfortunately, our lawsuit cannot remove the Director from his position. That responsibility lies with those entrusted to oversee the agency: the Fish & Wildlife Commission, the Legislature, and the Governor. If we want real change, those leaders must act. We need a full and transparent investigation into Susewind’s conduct and decisive action to restore accountability at WDFW.

We invite you to explore the materials on this page, review the evidence, and take action. Sign our petition calling for Susewind’s removal, and help ensure that Washington’s wildlife agency serves the public and wildlife with integrity.

Collusion Confidential

Social Media

Core Documents

Timeline of Key Events Leading to WW1 v. Susewind

September 11, 2023

Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (SAF) submits an expansive public records request targeting commissioners who opposed spring bear hunting — a broad request seeking communications later used to build allegations against dissenting commissioners.

September 11, 2023
January 13, 2025

Inslee reappoints Commissioner Tim Ragen and replaces Commissioner Molly Linville with Lynn O’Connor.

January 13, 2025
January – February 2025

Hunting and hatchery interests pressure new Governor Ferguson to reshape Commission make-up by removing commissioners viewed as obstacles to their agenda.

January – February 2025
January 15, 2025

Ferguson sworn into office.

January 15, 2025
January 17-24, 2025

In an undated letter, Ferguson asks the state Senate to return Inslee’s appointments without taking action.

January 17-24, 2025
January 27, 2025

SAF sues the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) over delayed records production. The lawsuit accelerated production of commissioner records responsive to SAF’s request.

January 27, 2025
February 5, 2025

Senate sends Gov. Inslee’s commission appointments back to Governor Ferguson, allowing Ferguson to officially rescind them.

February 5, 2025
February 6, 2025

Ferguson rescinds appointment of Lynn O’Connor and dismisses Commissioner Ragen effective immediately.

February 6, 2025
February 7-15, 2025

Ragen immediately returns his laptop computer to WDFW.

February 7-15, 2025

September 11, 2023

Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (SAF) submits an expansive public records request targeting commissioners who opposed spring bear hunting — a broad request seeking communications later used to build allegations against dissenting commissioners.

September 11, 2023
January 13, 2025

Inslee reappoints Commissioner Tim Ragen and replaces Commissioner Molly Linville with Lynn O’Connor.

January 13, 2025
January – February 2025

Hunting and hatchery interests pressure new Governor Ferguson to reshape Commission make-up by removing commissioners viewed as obstacles to their agenda.

January – February 2025
January 15, 2025

Ferguson sworn into office.

January 15, 2025
January 17-24, 2025

In an undated letter, Ferguson asks the state Senate to return Inslee’s appointments without taking action.

January 17-24, 2025
January 27, 2025

SAF sues the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) over delayed records production. The lawsuit accelerated production of commissioner records responsive to SAF’s request.

January 27, 2025
February 5, 2025

Senate sends Gov. Inslee’s commission appointments back to Governor Ferguson, allowing Ferguson to officially rescind them.

February 5, 2025
February 6, 2025

Ferguson rescinds appointment of Lynn O’Connor and dismisses Commissioner Ragen effective immediately.

February 6, 2025
February 7-15, 2025

Ragen immediately returns his laptop computer to WDFW.

February 7-15, 2025

February/March 2025

Susewind and Windrope direct staff to go through documents found on Ragen’s computer to find documents related to Smith and Rowland.

February/March 2025
March 4, 2025

By this date, Commission executive assistant Jamie Caldwell has started to provide Windrope with information relating to purported commission misconduct, including lists of meetings that Ragen, Smith, and Rowland had with animal advocacy groups, especially Washington Wildlife First (WW1).

March 4, 2025
March 19, 2025 (approx.)

Susewind and Windrope prepare a memorandum “For Review by AGO”, outlining allegations against Smith, Rowland, and Ragen, focusing heavily on their connections to WW1.

March 19, 2025 (approx.)
March 25, 2025

AAG Joe Panesko sends the Governor’s chief legal counsel a “Liability Analysis,” (“Panesko Memo”) prepared “with the support of WDFW senior management,” accusing Smith and Rowland of “collusive” conduct based largely on their association with WW1 and WFC, and targeting Davis as well.

March 25, 2025

February/March 2025

Susewind and Windrope direct staff to go through documents found on Ragen’s computer to find documents related to Smith and Rowland.

February/March 2025
March 4, 2025

By this date, Commission executive assistant Jamie Caldwell has started to provide Windrope with information relating to purported commission misconduct, including lists of meetings that Ragen, Smith, and Rowland had with animal advocacy groups, especially Washington Wildlife First (WW1).

March 4, 2025
March 19, 2025 (approx.)

Susewind and Windrope prepare a memorandum “For Review by AGO”, outlining allegations against Smith, Rowland, and Ragen, focusing heavily on their connections to WW1.

March 19, 2025 (approx.)
March 25, 2025

AAG Joe Panesko sends the Governor’s chief legal counsel a “Liability Analysis,” (“Panesko Memo”) prepared “with the support of WDFW senior management,” accusing Smith and Rowland of “collusive” conduct based largely on their association with WW1 and WFC, and targeting Davis as well.

March 25, 2025

May 2, 2025

WDFW produces 16,484 records to SA, providing additional communications later used in the allegations.

May 2, 2025
May 6, 2025

Susewind provides attorney Thomas Knoll two curated boxes of documents. The records were selected to support allegations against Smith, Rowland, and Davis.

May 6, 2025
May 11, 2025

Predator Watch post on Facebook that commissioners are “going down”. The post appears before formal notice of the allegations.

May 11, 2025
May 16, 2025

Knoll completes memo (“Knoll memo”) containing inflammatory and misleading allegations against Smith, Rowland, Davis, and WW1.

May 16, 2025
May 16, 2025

SAF files a 25-page petition seeking removal of Smith, Rowland, Lehmkuhl, and Baker. The petition asks Ferguson to remove the commissioners for alleged misconduct.

May 16, 2025
May 22, 2025

 Susewind emails Shane Esquibel, from the Governor’s office, and shares the Knoll memo after previously discussing it (“the evaluation we discussed”).

May 22, 2025
May 30, 2025

WDFW makes final production of 25,952 records to SAF, completing WDFW’s response to SAF’s public records request.

May 30, 2025

May 2, 2025

WDFW produces 16,484 records to SA, providing additional communications later used in the allegations.

May 2, 2025
May 6, 2025

Susewind provides attorney Thomas Knoll two curated boxes of documents. The records were selected to support allegations against Smith, Rowland, and Davis.

May 6, 2025
May 11, 2025

Predator Watch post on Facebook that commissioners are “going down”. The post appears before formal notice of the allegations.

May 11, 2025
May 16, 2025

Knoll completes memo (“Knoll memo”) containing inflammatory and misleading allegations against Smith, Rowland, Davis, and WW1.

May 16, 2025
May 16, 2025

SAF files a 25-page petition seeking removal of Smith, Rowland, Lehmkuhl, and Baker. The petition asks Ferguson to remove the commissioners for alleged misconduct.

May 16, 2025
May 22, 2025

Susewind emails Shane Esquibel, from the Governor’s office, and shares the Knoll memo after previously discussing it (“the evaluation we discussed”).

May 22, 2025
May 30, 2025

WDFW makes final production of 25,952 records to SAF, completing WDFW’s response to SAF’s public records request.

May 30, 2025

June 13, 2025

 Susewind and Commission Chair Baker exchange emails discussing informing commissioners about the Knoll memo and supporting documents, which reveal Susewind had already shared those materials with Ferguson’s office, and that Smith was never informed of them or provided with a chance to review them.

June 13, 2025
June 27, 2025

 SAF submits a supplemental petition to Ferguson, adding new allegations based on WDFW’s final records production.

June 27, 2025
August 5, 2025

Susewind sends Governor Ferguson a formal letter requesting an investigation into Commissioners Smith, Rowland, Baker, and Lehmkuhl.

August 5, 2025
August 15, 2025

Columbia Insight reports Susewind requested a formal investigation into four commissioners on August 5, and Ferguson authorized his request.

August 15, 2025
August 14, 2025

Franklin Plaistowe, from the Governor’s office, contacts investigator Nziramasanga to discuss Susewind’s request and schedules an intake meeting.

August 14, 2025
August 19-21, 2025

Initial Plaistowe-Nziramasanga intake meeting takes place (Aug. 19). On Aug 21, Plaistowe sends Knoll memo and related materials to Nziramasanga, as “starting point” for the investigation.

August 19-21, 2025
December 18–19, 2025

Smith is interviewed by investigator Nziramasanga while still unaware of the Knoll memo, curated documents, or the true origins of the investigation.

December 18–19, 2025

June 13, 2025

Susewind and Commission Chair Baker exchange emails discussing informing commissioners about the Knoll memo and supporting documents, which reveal Susewind had already shared those materials with Ferguson’s office, and that Smith was never informed of them or provided with a chance to review them.

June 13, 2025
June 27, 2025

 SAF submits a supplemental petition to Ferguson, adding new allegations based on WDFW’s final records production.

June 27, 2025
August 5, 2025

Susewind sends Governor Ferguson a formal letter requesting an investigation into Commissioners Smith, Rowland, Baker, and Lehmkuhl.

August 5, 2025
August 15, 2025

 Columbia Insight reports Susewind requested a formal investigation into four commissioners on August 5, and Ferguson authorized his request.

August 15, 2025
August 14, 2025

Franklin Plaistowe, from the Governor’s office, contacts investigator Nziramasanga to discuss Susewind’s request and schedules an intake meeting.

August 14, 2025
August 19-21, 2025

Initial Plaistowe-Nziramasanga intake meeting takes place (Aug. 19). On Aug 21, Plaistowe sends Knoll memo and related materials to Nziramasanga, as “starting point” for the investigation.

August 19-21, 2025
December 18–19, 2025

Smith is interviewed by investigator Nziramasanga while still unaware of the Knoll memo, curated documents, or the true origins of the investigation.

December 18–19, 2025

February 11, 2026

OFM rejects requests to withhold Knoll memo and releases it to the press.

February 11, 2026
February 13, 2026

 The Washington State Standard publishes a story on the Knoll memo, making it publicly known, but does not post the full memo.

February 13, 2026
February 2026

Smith files public records requests for the Knoll documents, seeking the underlying records used to generate the allegations.

February 2026
March 31, 2026

SAF publicly posts the Knoll memo.

March 31, 2026
April 2, 2026

Washington Wildlife First, Claire Loebs Davis, and Commissioner Smith file federal civil rights claims against Susewind and Windrope, alleging First Amendment retaliation, viewpoint discrimination, and abuse of state power to target and punish dissent.

April 2, 2026

February 11, 2026

OFM rejects requests to withhold Knoll memo and releases it to the press.

February 11, 2026
February 13, 2026

The Washington State Standard publishes a story on the Knoll memo, making it publicly known, but does not post the full memo.

February 13, 2026
February 2026

Smith files public records requests for the Knoll documents, seeking the underlying records used to generate the allegations.

February 2026
March 31, 2026

SAF publicly posts the Knoll memo.

March 31, 2026
April 2, 2026

Washington Wildlife First, Claire Loebs Davis, and Commissioner Smith file federal civil rights claims against Susewind and Windrope, alleging First Amendment retaliation, viewpoint discrimination, and abuse of state power to target and punish dissent.

April 2, 2026

July 31, 2026

Governor Ferguson’s office releases the Final Investigation Report and Addendum. The report finds some inconsistent compliance, but no intentional or self-interested wrongdoing, unlawful litigation collusion, statutory conflicts of interest, systemic harassment, or retaliation, while confirming Susewind instigated the investigation and defined its allegations.

July 31, 2026
August 31, 2026

 Franklin Plaistowe sends letters admonishing Smith and Rowland, but no other commissioners. His letter to Smith stretches the report’s findings, warns against associations creating even an “appearance” of conflict, and threatens removal if she fails to comply.

August 31, 2026
September 10, 2026

Governor Ferguson’s office releases the previously withheld Appendix to the Final Report, revealing the investigation relied on 76 documents totaling 1,198 pages and disclosing previously privileged evidence, including the “Panesko Memo.”

September 10, 2026

July 31, 2026

Governor Ferguson’s office releases the Final Investigation Report and Addendum. The report finds some inconsistent compliance, but no intentional or self-interested wrongdoing, unlawful litigation collusion, statutory conflicts of interest, systemic harassment, or retaliation, while confirming Susewind instigated the investigation and defined its allegations.

July 31, 2026
August 31, 2026

Franklin Plaistowe sends letters admonishing Smith and Rowland, but no other commissioners. His letter to Smith stretches the report’s findings, warns against associations creating even an “appearance” of conflict, and threatens removal if she fails to comply.

August 31, 2026
September 10, 2026

Governor Ferguson’s office releases the previously withheld Appendix to the Final Report, revealing the investigation relied on 76 documents totaling 1,198 pages and disclosing previously privileged evidence, including the “Panesko Memo.”

September 10, 2026

Media Coverage